Bowsite.com

If baiting is bad for wildlife, then it should be banned across the board, public and private, statewide, period.

Very often people jump into that debate with all their “my land, my decision” indignation. Then you find out that they have a little piece of baited ground and they really just don’t want competition from the public land hunters.

All the bigger QDM guys don’t want the public baiting, because one of those smuck’s or his kid might kill one of “their” managed bucks.

The guy sitting in the middle of a huge chunk of private ag land, shooting bucks that use the same trails and funnels to get to the crops doesn’t want baiting either for the same reason as the QDM guys.

And then I guess the researchers better define what the smallest size food plot can be to be safe.

And as far as “follow the money” I’m amazed how often that trail leads back to the people making tons of money on QDM. Much of the “research” is funded by them too and many times the “experts” cited have ties back to QDM.

I’m all for guys improving and hunting their properties. It’s a purpose and pleasure all on its own and can bring great satisfaction. Sometimes more than killing a big buck!

But the #MeOnly movement is strong here.

Others are driven by greed, and the unregulated outfitters in our State are the absolute worst kind of money grubbers you can imagine.

I’ve got no problems with people who bait. But, there’s no denying it affects on wildlife.

Turkey numbers have plummeted since baiting was legalized in WV. Is it connected? In my mind it is.

Just do what suits you and let others do the same. But, I don’t set still watching tv for hours at a time. So, setting still and watching a pile of corn isn’t high on my to do list either.

To each their own. It’s just boring as heck to me. And, it’s counter productive to actually killing any nature deer in my experience.

I'm not a whitetail hunter. The few I've shot were mostly from public land, in Alberta farmland, from tree stands set up by my nephew. It was fun. But I'd rather endure the pain and misery of five unsuccessful northern mountain, back pack goat hunts than be emersed in the whitetail hunting industry that I see on display. Its just as polarized as the abortion or gender debates with everybody swallowing anything form anybody from anywhere that bolsters their bias.

Yes, I listened to the Primos podcast. Then I back trailed the participants. Follow the money or industry connection.

From watching the CWD research and mitigation efforts for years now, mostly western Canada, and then observing actual outcomes, I've come to some conclusions (beliefs) of my own, but I'm always open to new scientific information.

But I think the epitome of hypocrisy (and they post here) is the guy that is spitting mad on a whitetail bating thread and denouncing anybody that does it as a friggin useless moron, then starts a thread about his upcoming baited spring bear hunt. A hunt where he sits in a stand put up by somebody else, hunts over bait placed by somebody else then when asked says ".. well it would be really hard to kill one otherwise"

But I guess asking whitetail hunters to be honest and respectful is like asking the same of all the Karens in life.

I'm happy I don't take whitetails seriously.

Baiters constantly, and repeatedly, try to change the narrative to justify their shortcomings...just don't work.

I wonder if biologists in Wyoming consider their feed grounds detrimental to elk? Montana may not like it, Idaho may not like it, but Wyoming evidently thinks it is the best approach for their elk herd.

In the 90's we had many more deer than we do now, hence the antlerless season pushed by insurance companies to reduce deer/vehicle collisions. One of those seasons, I personally shot 5 does and 2 bucks with everything from recurve, to blackpowder, to high powered rifle. The 2nd buck was on a leftover permit they now give to unthankful nonresidents.

Baiting has single handedly redirected decades old deer movements that caused mature bucks to travel miles in search of does and food. Bucks that once ranged 5 miles giving many folks opportunities, now stay year round on smaller parcels. As I mentioned last season, I ran into an outfitter that leases prime ground I've hunted next to for 28 years. He bragged "his booners" never leave his two sections because of the tons of feed he puts on the ground.

I absolutely hate it, and I view any buck killed over feed as an animal trained like livestock by a lazy shooter that has zero skills.

Do you care if I hunt your land? It is the least you could do.

Or this..."Well stop walking around without pants on"?

Kettle = black

P.S. The deer population in KS was estimated at 707k in 2021, and 699k in 2023...so math, along with writing/spelling are not things to scoff at?

I don’t hunt over bait, but not sure I see correlation with literally 2 data points. Those data points sure wouldn’t cause me to see the harm baiting is doing in Kansas - if the data I’m shown is a 1.1% decline from 2021 to 2023….

If you or anyone wants to take the time to listen to a well presented dialogue on the detremental effects of baiting you can watch this. I doubt you will, as it's more important to you and others to grip-n-grin a buck you merely trained to come to a pre-determined spot on a map, then to actually hunt and work to preserve the wildlife you pursue.

The overall herd is down, but number of mature deer(yes mainly bucks) is much less. This can be attributed to a multitude of things...leniant weapon choices(including Xguns in acrchery season), more tags being issued, NR's taking younger bucks because they paid $5-10k and aren't going home empty handed, and yes CWD.

We do need a better way to track the numbers, but for now all we can attest to is what we personally observe.

? Please have someone read the chart to you.

You mean the crop damage reporting one?

Not judging it, or saying it's evil. May not be popular, but that type of critter killing does need another name aside from "hunting".

Just some food for thought. In a heavily forested, nonagriculture state, where would prey species tend to congregate? I reckon the predators follow. And enjoy the benefits of hunting their food in concentrated areas.

Like I said before, I have zero issues on how anyone decides to approach this. I have no moral obligation to any animal that makes me feel like I should apologize or feel bad if I decided to hunt over bait to kill it. It’s not about anything other than predators surely capitalize on the opportunities that bait sites give them. And the increase of disease it causes might not be proven science. But, I don’t imagine theirs funding for something that indisputable.

"My family killed 10 huge bucks off my property but i had to dump $4000 of corn out for them to get them wary bastards off my 80 acres"

That was my neighbour told me that. And yes I thought it was weird.

I've got 6 adjacent neighbors not counting ones on the other side of a rd. 8 total. Every single one baits and 6 are within 150 yards of the fence 3 are within 25 yards.

All are incredulous that I dont bait.

I invited some friends to hunt doe last year and the ones from "up north" showed up and wanted a tour to view how deer used the property.

The ones from down south wanted to know where the nearest corn vendor was. They were ecstatic to find there was a coin operated corn dispenser (made me laugh too) so they could dump corn that night for the next morning. If there had not been that option they were fully prepared to not hunt until Walmart could sell them some bags of corn the next morning.

That bears repeating... on an unbelievably good deer hunting property they wouldn't hunt without sitting over a pile of corn. As an aside they also wouldn't hunt without an enclosed blind with propane heat when it was well above freezing (32).

Cultural norms are amazingly strong and absolutely inviolable.

Would you be ok with baiting for Elk?

Squirrel: That's an interesting perspective. If you're raised with a "this is how things are done" mentality, it would seem that laying out bait is a perfectly normal thing.

Bowfreak...agreed, there's a lot of gray there. I guess this is more of a philosophical question. As a trapper, I'm leaving bait to lure the critter into my trap, but this is called trapping, not hunting.

If you say to someone.. "I'm going deer hunting", it's a general term they understand, and the weapon or particular technique involved in hunting that deer is secondary.

Gentlemen, I retract my statement regarding baiting. It's still hunting. (Here's where the church lady says..."Nevermind")

I will add though, the common blue collar family can no longer afford to raise their kids on a farm because of wealthy hunters "calling the shots" on land prices as one realtor told me.

The American dream to have a farm, raise, kids and livestock is a nothing but a dream for most folks now. I work with a bunch of country girl nurses, that despite their decent pay, and their husband's decent pay in a factory or other labor job, can barely afford 5 acres and a house.

I could give a damn less if my deer property fell in value to nothing. It would just mean I could buy more. I plan on donating mine to the state anyway when I die for disabled kid hunts, wounded warriors, etc. I've had no less than 5 millionaire/billionaires offer to buy my property. I wouldn't even need a land agent. I could just send a text, and show up at the title company with my banker.

I'm just glad I had the sense to buy when it was still dirt cheap.

He'll guarantee it lol

I have no idea who came up with the corn "pile" Very strange system. Never seen anything like that here.

Many times from Oct. to March I may have up to 70 plus broadcast feeders running as well as many gravity protein feeders and fish feeders in some of the managed lakes and tanks

The wide area of distribution and small amount of corn being distributed insures that it is cleaned up before any mold or excessive multi animal use spoils the area

On the border ranches the corn is medicated ( govt mandates) with Ivamectin to help control the Mexican fever tick. The added benefit of that is it controls internal and external parasites on all of the various animals that eat that corn including but not limited to coyote Fox raccoon turkey deer javelina hogs. End result is some very healthy animals

I guess we have been very lucky the last 41 years in not having any CWD show up on our free range or fenced ranches

Whoever sent me a PM, not ignoring you. Bowsite won’t let me open them right now.

Did your poacher buddy come again this year?

As a kid I remember the corn, alfalfa, hay warnings. If you want stinky deer those feeding on the split grain on the railroad are about the worst. Meat seemed a little rank too.

Anyway, my two cents which is probably worthless compared to the actual experience many guys on here have. I agree with Ambush that anything that poses a health risk to the wildlife should be banned. Period. I see lots of guys who want baiting banned talking about the dangerous of feeding deer corn. Corn is their buzz word. If that’s the case, would those people be happy if the regulations just specified what you can and cannot use for bait? What if it was an extremely healthy nutritional food? What if they did actually benefit the overall herd? Would that change the opinion of those against it? If they are really concerned with the welfare of wildlife they would probably say it’s OK. But instead we’d find out real fast who has their own personal reasons for their opinion.

Same goes for the people in favor of baiting. I highly doubt that the majority have the welfare of deer in mind when they spend money to bait. So I don’t think there’s any question it’s for personal gain. But in the process, if done properly, and they are truly only shooting mature deer then it does stand to benefit the deer population in that area.

I believe that compromise is always the best solution. If I were the one writing the laws, I wouldn’t allow or eliminate most things. Instead, I would take a good look at what’s going on and just make sure it was done properly. That would mean either specifying what people can use for bait and maybe also regulating what times of year it is legal. I’m pretty sure we can come up with some things that would be more beneficial to deer in the late season, then the limited nutrition stuff they are left to winter on. If it’s not corn fine. But the debate should not revolve around corn alone.

One other thing worth mentioning is that I have lots of friends living in states where baiting is legal, and they do not bait. There is something to be said for that. To me it shows that the return on your investment of time and money to bait is not all it’s cracked up to be.

I agree that Forest’s post was a very good one. I like a man who takes accountability and isn’t afraid to apologize if he thinks he’s wrong. Hats off

Since you’re so good at putting words in other people’s mouths with regard to this topic I’ll take a stab at doing the same…

“My properties are subpar compared to my neighbors. I need corn piles to level the playing field and give deer a reason to travel on my ground. Without it I’d have to spend money on beneficial habitat work that improves the livelihoods of multiple species. Antlers are far more important to me than the current trends in Turkey/upland bird populations, disease mitigation, and overpopulations of predator species that are affecting many of our game species. I understand my bait sites have an affect on all those dynamics, but I simply don’t care enough to change my ways. Antlers are more important. I start threads about the future rights/privileges of the hunting community to virtue signal my good intentions, but if those rights and privileges aren’t directly correlated to my ability to acquire big antlers I don’t really care in the end. Folks who want rights and privileges to hunt healthy populations of turkeys, pheasants, quail and prairie chickens be damned. I refuse to give up my right to negatively affect their experience!”

"like a man" Be a man and get yourself access to thousands of acres of ag land and sit on the edge of standing or picked corn or beans or peas or whatever, and shoot a buck that habitually uses the same pattern because of the crop.

I have no problem with the banning of bait, or some types of bait or even amounts of bait, IF emotionless science is followed. But if the "science" presented is applied the same way it is for, say, banning some firearms, than no. If it's driven by the moral or ethical constructs of someone's own mind, then I can't support it. Anybody can cherry pick data to support their argument, just look at some of the socio/political threads on here.

At one point I remember there being a big battle amongst hunters in Michigan about being limited to one five gallon pail of corn. The pros and cons were pretty much "its all about me!"

I don't expect fair dialogue from SitO or Thorton, or even respectful debate, but they're also two guys that claim to have access to thousands of acres of private land to hunt. Neither has any regard or sympathy for the Towny and his twelve year old (maybe future) hunter. And I fully expect the dripping with sarcasm retort of " well there's no future for the kid if all the deer in Kansas are dead from Pat's corn pile either!!"

I just reject any argument or evidence pushed at me by hate. Especially hate of specific "types" of people. Eventually someone will make enough noise to be heard over the rest and get the government to do the right thing, because the government always does the right thing when it gets to them. And we know when they've done their job when nobody is happy.

Every guy on this post is hunting antlers. If you weren't you would shoot the first deer that walk buy ya. I know you dont do that. Your waiting for big antlers guaranteed

I have questions that can't be answered. How does CWD "spontaneously" appear in herds of reindeer separated from our "epicenter" by thousands of miles of ocean? Is it possible that nature has used this disease as population control for thousands of years? The strong survive and carry on? There are millions more whitetail in NA now than there were before Europeans brought mass agriculture. Its an artificially dense population maintained through artificially high food sources. What you're used to seeing in not natural and maybe nature is correcting that.

It's like wild horse lovers that have convinced themselves that wild horses are natural because they've been here the lovers whole short lives on earth.

Herding, grazing and browsing animals are designed to live in close proximity to each other and cover the same ground over and over and over. I can easily agree that a thousand pound corn pile that rots and molds is not likely beneficial and quite possibly detrimental. But can the same be said for five pound piles spaced hundreds of yards apart and replenished frequently? Does corn laying on the ground in a picked field go moldy? How many pounds of corn per acre is left in the field after harvest. If someone broadcasts that same amount of pounds per acre in a clearing on their two acres, is that corn now magically deadlier than the stuff in the field?

Sometimes we take too short a view of history and I think outdoors people are particularly guilty of this, always referencing "the good old days". I was at a fish and wildlife gathering a number of years ago. A speaker started out his presentation by stating beavers were partly to blame for the lower than "normal" inland salmon runs. What!??! Beaver were trapped hard two hundred years ago and few remained. They're dams washed out and provided access to more spawning grounds. Salmon increased. We quit trapping beavers and they plugged up those spawning channels again and salmon decreased, but now it was within our memory. All we could say was "it's not the good old days" and blame anything and everything just to be able to point a finger. When in fact it was probably more natural. But we don't want "more natural".

Maybe you just need far less deer on your landscape to be of actual benefit to their health.

It’s not About private management of privately owned land. It’s About State management of a publicly held resource.

Baiting and food plots Privatize the Public Resource as their primary objective. In direct conflict with the fundamental premise of the North American Model. Both practices also concentrate wildlife at unnaturally high population densities — population density being one of the key variables in EVERY epidemiological model, EVER. And yes, thereby putting the Resource at elevated risk on a Regional scale.

So rather than “ Who are you to tell someone what to do with their property[?]”, maybe ask who the hell are private landowners to be putting a Public Resource at risk for the sake of personal gain?

If someone wants to put out bait for a week or so to make it possible to quickly cull a pile of does in an area where that’s necessary/beneficial for the health of the herd, I’m all for it. Outside of that specific use case, JMO the future of Hunting is brighter when bait-free.

There are people here who can't even spell "banned" FFS.

Well said Corax.

Where do I begin? If spending $10,000 a year on high end clothing, thousand dollar backpacks and every gadget in the world that makes sure bows shoot bullseyes doesn’t actually give us a slam dunk or make it easier. Why do we use all that stuff? This is Bowsite. It’s made up of people who could potentially make life a hell of a lot easier and way more of a slam dunk by using rifles but they choose not to. If you think baiting, makes killing deer a slam dunk, you obviously have no experience with it. Have you ever tried killing mature bears over bait? I’ve been to New Brunswick and watched a hundred bears come in and out. Not one shooter. They show up on the cameras in the middle of the night. Hmm

Like I said, I am not for or against baiting. But if someone wants to make a comment that doesn’t hold water, I’ll be glad to reply based on my actual experience, as limited as it may be.

You probably won't believe this, but I know traditional bowhunters that sit over failure piles? Why did they ever even pick up a bow to begin with?

What is the issue here? Is it the idea of an unfair advantage or the harmful affects on wildlife? Or just something you don’t care for? That’s fine. I don’t care for liver so I just don’t eat it. You can if you choose to. I don’t mind. Truly nothing personal here for me. Again I don’t care either way and certainly don’t judge anyone on either side of the debate. Your thoughts on my ideas about a compromise? Oh… deer eating at the same restaurant will all get sick. I guess I forgot about that. I guess the fact that they have been feeding the elk hay in the same place near Jackson Wyoming for decades without problem made me think it’s not that big of a factor. My guess is that coyotes are a bigger threat to whitetail deer populations than corn.

Shall we wait until the herd in Jackson gets sick, or the deer feeding on the "trough" videos? Do you honestly believe that cervids need our help to have survived as long as they have?

No compromise is warranted, I choose to hunt wild animals.

I live in a state where baiting for anything is prohibited. We’re not even allowed to use InLine muzzleloaders. So I’ve never really put much thought into it. I do know that people in different areas have different practices, different beliefs, different opinions, as well as different laws. I also know that a lot of these people think it’s OK to impose limitations on each other because they feel their way should be the only way. That is something I definitely do not care for.

If he filled the feeder with acorns would you be ok with it?

I too don’t understand the desire from some of you guys to continue to berate another for hunting over bait. It’s stupid beyond description. Not to mention tactless and something I’m sure would go different if not on a key board.

be still, why don’t you be quite. You’ve made your point. Forest or no one else is going to apologize for hunting over bait. Nor should they.

I know a guy that looks at baiting like SitO. Not only does he not like it, he talks down to anyone he can who does. Just so happens the people he’s looking down on works for him. So, he feels like he’s convinced them all of their errors. Instead, they just stay quiet and let him rant.

That’s pretty much what’s going on here. Two guys are so over bearing it’s like they are bullying their way to a self proclaimed victory. It’s stupid on top of ignorant to keep beating that war drum. Who are you helping? It isn’t about the wildlife with the non baiters either. It’s about shaming. Just look at this thread for proof.

Do your own thing. Those setting corn as their staple hunting aren’t going to be doing it forever. This group is an aging bunch. I’m likely the youngest respondent to this thread. And, I’m 50 years old!!!!!!

What's interesting in Manitoba is that hunting over bait is illegal for white people due to CWD concerns, but interestingly enough if anywhere in your lineage there is indigenous ancestry and you can therefore have a Metis card now it is legal for you to bait, and a whole host of other things.

Also interesting is our neighbours to the west (Saskatchewan) can bait, and to the east (Ontario) can also bait.

My personal wish for Manitoba would be that either no one baits or everyone can bait, it's stupid to have it based on the colour of your skin. Baiting for bear is common practise. The animal changes and it is now a deer and suddenly it's the world's most evil practise. I get how guys can be passionate about it, but I just don't see the vile-ness in the act itself, unless negative byproduct is very evident. In SK or Ontario I just don't see the evidence.

And a few are more concerned with hating the sinner than the affects of the sin.

I sometimes search posts on unrelated topics from some zealous posters on subjects like baiting. It is amazing how many anti baiters have stories or advice posts with lines like:

"I found where several trails came together through the crop to the fence edge and set up my stand just inside"

"I could see the deer feeding on leftover corn along the edge coming toward my stand"

"I could just see the buck's back above the four rows of uncut corn that the farmer (or I, my uncle, dad, neighbor) left for me and he would feed by at twenty yards."

"The little arm of corn that jutted into the bush was full of deer when the sun came up and I had set my stand perfectly."

"This kill plot was about to pay off again!"

"I asked the farmer where he'd be cutting next so I could set up to take advantage of that."

I know its true, but I don't know the science behind what makes corn in a field good for deer, but after it has touched a five gallon bucket it becomes poison. One of life's mysteries.

bowwild: when you shoot a bear over bait, do you drag it back to the barrels for the pics? Or an antelope shot at a waterhole if it ran eighty yards, do you drag it back to the waterhole and lay it where it was standing at the shot?

I may have hurt some feelings, I assure you it was intentional.

But I do have one of my questions answered with a quick search, though no admission from you. Two of the few recent pictures you posted were your view from your treestand. Both about twenty yards from a Failure Field. So I guess that's how far a crop fed buck has to be to be edible and ethically killed. Or at least you as the so called hunter has to be twenty yards. Pretty sure the buck can have his feet in the feed.

Rest easy though because at least you don't have to worry about me coming to Kansas with a poison pail and ruining your whole hunting season. I don't want your depression on my conscience.

Hunting fields is absolutely no comparison to a failure pile or feeder. I planted a tiny 2 acre plot once after I bought my property, and in an entire October of multiple sits, the bucks never came within bow range that year.

Conditioning a wild animal to come to feed a few feet diameter under your tree it just like training livestock, nothing more.

Ironically I've spent the day walking properties, looking for sheds...trails.. and natural deer sign. You, and others, spent the day resting on your laurels, struggling to find a way to justify poisoning and shooting trained animals.

I found random spots to actually "ambush" my prey. I'm lucky I get to spend the entire Fall hunting. You and the others should try it sometime...I think you'd enjoy it.

Oh, and I don’t think you’ve ever heard me complain about my hunting lot or other hunter’s successes. Free yourself and maybe you can be content too.

At least in this scenario she'd actually be hunting, and she could be proud of her accomplishment.

And then there will be one less jerk in this circle, too. Make it easier to see who wins.

I dont know very many guys that can take that amout of time off. I personally have no desire to hunt 60 days in a row and not kill a deer. Other animals possibly but not a whitetail.

Your comments on follow the money were spot on

Way to funny.

I’ve known and Hunted all over North America with Forest the last 15 years. He is one of the most generous people I’ve ever met and I’m proud to call him my friend. Every year he donates a hunt or two for, auction, disabled person or kid hunt. (See pic) Additionally, he puts lease money in the hands of Kansas land owners and supports the local community in Kansas.

Many of the guys that hunt with Forest each year in Kansas (12-15 guys) end up shooting their best buck ever. We have a blast. Remember, there’s three sides to ever story, yours, mine and the truth. If/when baiting is eliminated in Kansas he’ll adjust. Get it done.

PS: Every time there’s a thread about this subject Forest books a hunter or two. How ironic.

Enjoy yourself, it’s later than you think.

Keep up the good fight Forest!

It’s later than you think. I like that!

You spent the whole thread antagonizing the guy. Don’t blow smoke that you were civil. Civility doesn’t include that. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it

One thing everyone knows is that baiting isn't hunting, that's common knowledge.

There's no "fight", but being on the side of baiting certainly isn't "good"...proven multiple times above.

Midwest WT hunting is already one of the easiest physical hunts there is. It requires the least amount of walking, the least amount of elevation climbing, the least amount of remote travel, is the easiest tag to get, can generally be done from your home or hotel without overnight travel into the bush, is one of the highest populations of big game on the continent and has some of the highest average number of game per square mile over a given area. (Not in universal terms, but in general). There is no other big game animal in North America that a bow hunter could literally feed a village with.

There are only a few things that make it more challenging like hunting with a bow and hunting public land. But above all else, the one thing that makes it a difficult hunt is the chess game that is required when hunting mature bucks.

If you just want to slay big game animals, the Midwest WT deer is by far the easiest effort:meat and time:meat ratio hunt there is. The chess game that is... killing mature WT bucks, is the single most difficult thing about the entire venture. And I think all or most of us here would agree that getting an arrow into a mature WT buck is a difficult thing to do.

Baiting takes a slice out of that chess game and to those that say that hunting over bait is no sure thing, of course it isn't a sure thing. But if it didn't work/help then why do it? People do it because it's effective. Because you can bait and have animals come to the specific spot where the bait is and eat it. I've sat on even 1 acre planted parcels where I didn't have a bow shot on a shooter buck. Multiple times. Bait brings animals to a specific spot and that makes it easier.

IMO, it stacks a card in the game and the fact that so many people do it is evidence thereof. If it didn't work, you wouldn't do it.

On a personal level, that game is everything to me. So whether or not you want to admit that baiting is detrimental to wildlife or not, I still say sitO has a legitimate reason to have righteous indignation for the reason of the game being stacked even if it doesn't harm wildlife, although it is at least hypothesized that it does, which is a big deal to conservation-minded people, so again, he's righteous.

Everyone of us on here are passionate about hunting, sitO included. Deer hunting is a sacred thing. In his estimation, you cheapen that sacred thing by baiting, so he's going to look down on you if you do it. I understand guys not wanting to be looked down upon, but you're doing something that's offensive to him, so what else would you expect?

It's perfectly legal to snort up a loogie and spit it on the ground in front of ladies and you won't hurt anyone by doing it. But some of us look down on guys that would do that. It's also perfectly legal to tell dirty jokes in mixed company or cuss in church. Legality and "lack of hurting someone/something" often times have very little to do with things being socially acceptable or looked down upon.

Where I live in interior AK, moose hunting is the big thing around here. Most people on this website from the lower 48 would think of a moose hunt as a backcountry adventure or even a dream hunt. But most of my neighbors just drive around in their trucks or ATVs and shoot moose with a rifle, often times on the side of the road. It's completely non-romantic and unadventurous.

They have their reasons for it and mostly it's because they're just trying to fill the freezer. Likewise, people I work with think I'm crazy to hunt with a bow on foot, but we look at it differently. Yes, I'm trying to fill the freezer too and I eat game meat twice a day year round, but I'm also in it for the game, the adventure, and I'm a little bit of a trophy hunter as well, so by driving around in my truck and shooting something on the side of the highway, it cheapens that. If I shot a moose on the side of the road, I couldn't hang that rack on my wall because I'd be caught between not having pride in it and feeling silly about it, even though a big bull moose rack is a dream of most American hunters.

And it's sort of the same way with WT deer. It's bizarre to some people to take the most difficult part of WT hunting, specifically trying to kill mature bucks, especially with a bow, but then cheapen that accomplishment by baiting in order to make it a little easier. You can argue that it doesn't make it much easier, but the quantity is irrelevant - maybe not to you, but to other people it is.

And I think a lot of people's defensiveness comes from the fact that deep down, they know they're making it easier on themselves, but while they don't care about that fact enough to not do it because the degree to which the experience is cheapened is insignificant or non-existent to them, they don't like getting called on it because they don't like the fact that someone would look down on them for it.

You can't have it both ways. Hunt over bait if you want, but don't expect everyone to think that what you're doing is on the same level as getting it done without bait. Most people are fine with it and if you're fine with it, then knock yourself out. But thinking that any man is exempt from catching shit about anything is just silly.

I don't know anything about this drama but this made me laugh for some reason.

This made me laugh. What the hell does baiting have to do with political ideology. Dumb post. Leave it up to a Trumper to insert politics into anything and everything even when it has nothing to do with it.

I'll be a character witness for Sito. From personal experience he has offered to pay, and paid, for several posters membership into the Kansas Bowhunters Association. The guy passes it on and puts his money where his mouth is. He's a funny dude and a good guy who gives a #%^* about KS archery hunting and fair chase.

If you are baiting you aren't hunting. Baiting also has a negative impact on support from non-hunters. Even non-hunters in support of hunting recognize that it's cheating.

“… so expect to get looked down on…”

Well, at least we have finally legitimized the right of trad bow hunters to look down on compound bow hunters.

If you have a deer head of any kind hanging on a wall that was “shot” over bait, do me a favor and walk over to it and place this on the wall next to it….*

It's funny cause I would have no issue with baiting being illegal it already is where I hunt, but I just have to point out what I think are logical issues. Idyll, everything you said makes sense. The only major difference here is that sitO isn't simply trying to let everyone know that he looks down on them for their version of hunting. He wants their version of hunting gone. It's like if I thought hound hunting for cats was immoral and therefore tried to have it eliminated from being legal. I'm no longer simply looking down on them for their way of hunting, I am trying to have it removed because I don't like it. Now if baiting really turns out to be an ecological train wreck - hey all the more reason to have it gone. I've just never seen the ecological train wreck in Canada, and maybe even the opposite. I also get a little touchy about any step in making any type of hunting illegal whether I agree with it or not, because no steps are EVER taken in the opposite direction. So anything you lose will be lost forever. It's just another chink in the armour.

Please don't wait until it's the "ecological trainwreck" we have here in KS

These threads have been heavily Kansas-centric, if you will, the last couple years as that’s where the most serious discussion regarding baiting is/has taken place. The department has continually told hunters they advise against baiting based on the science. They laid out the science and have, for now, left it up to hunters to decide because they’re largely handcuffed by state government and money with regards to making a change. I think a nonresident outfitter balking at that stance/science and telling folks he baits as a management tool (to select older bucks) when the department has asked for no such action brings out even stronger opinions on the matter. Those opinions then get twisted and projected onto folks’ practices in other regions with completely different wildlife dynamics. It can be that corn piles in Kansas are a serious negative on wildlife as a whole, yet bear baiting in Alaska for example, where black bears clean up as much as 50% of the local blacktail fawn crop is incredibly necessary and beneficial. Predators should be managed by any means necessary in my opinion. Don’t let some thoughts on corn piles in Kansas ruffle your feathers about wolf trapping, bear management, or lion hunting. They really have nothing in common and would significantly shorten these threads I think. :)

Do you really need a dog to find and flush your birds? Cheating if you ask me, find the sign and hunt the birds yourself. Flush'em and shoot'em. Lazy and for sure you're not hunting, the dog is, you're just a shooter.

I don't have a problem with people trying to eliminate baiting and in a place like Kansas it might well open up more ground for those that don't have the luxury of private to hunt. When landowners can't lease out for profit, then they might be more inclined to give permission.

But I do have a problem with people looking down on people with different perspectives. Its one thing to say you disagree with the method of hunting but to say that they are not hunting is pure elitist snobbery bullshit. To say their animal is illegitimate is the height of arrogance. They are indeed hunting, just not like you would like it done. Foam and fume all you want, they are still hunting. I'd say 95% of whitetail hunters are perfectly happy with whatever deer they shoot, doe, spike, fork or basket rack. Even better, they don't give a shit about "your standards".

And KSflatlander, I'm especially disappointed in you as you sit in your treestand on private land next to ag crops. Of all people I'd expect tolerance and acceptance of divergent beliefs from you.

The guy that dusts off his old, cheap single shot twenty gauge, walks a skid trail and ground sluices a couple grouse and then walks back whistling and enjoying the sunshine is a hunter. Just as much as the dressed up dude with the heirloom, double hammer English SXS and the kennel bought and trained brace of Brittanies, only shooting pointed and boot flushed birds on the rise.

Basically how someone else defines their hunting is not your prevue. What part of that don't you understand?

If you can tell me where the shooter buck is going to enter the 400 acre bean field daily then step up. A 400 acre ag field is not the same as a corn pile but that seems to be your only argument...even if it's really weak and not Apple to apples comparison.

But you have made a secondy point with you ag field analogy. I don't train deer to come within shooting distance of my stand. I move my stand to where they are active. And it changes every year. Actually hunting them.

A 400 acre corn field is not the same as a corn pile with a stand 10 yards from the feeder...no matter how many times you say it. The intent of planting crops is not to attract deer (99% of the time). It will be on the landscape regardless if I hunt or not. Ag fields don't lure a deer to a single point every time they feed in it. It's not the same.

And don't act like you've always been perfectly civil in all Bowsite interaction because I've seen you give it pretty well too.

Funny, I see pics and read descriptions of real hunters sitting on small plots and fields or in the twenty yard wide funnel between fields.

Maybe give the minimum size plot that would be considered hunting. Nobody else has answered that yet.

It's not just "doing something different" Rod, it's training an animal like Pavlov. None of your comparisons hold water. I know you know this, yet you keep throwing out excuses to try and justify...it can't be justified I'm sorry.

Truth be told I couldn't let an arrow fly at any deer eating from a pile of corn. I think it's unethical IMO. Honestly, I'm not just hunting to kill. I hunt the way I hunt because I feel that me and the deer are on an equal and fair playing field. Actually, the odds of getting away is better than me filling my tag because I don't tag out every year. I think baiting is an unfair advantage.

If you think your comparison of an ag field is valid then take a couple 50lb bags of corn and evenly spread it throughout 400 acres of any habitat and hunt it. See how well you can train a buck to stand in a certain location. Hell, try that in a 1 acre area. That is a more legit comparison vs the one you put forth.

There is exactly one person on here that goes to other’s post and trash talks those hunter. It’s the same guy that goes on the meat pole threads and trash talks there. His standard reply on all those threads is:

“Nice animal and you hunted him too” You get the implication.

“Nice animal, but too bad you didn’t hunt him”.

I don’t vote in Kansas. I don’t lobby in Kansas. I have no stake in Kansas. And by now Kansas is sounds like a place I’d like to avoid.

But there have been no answers to the questions I’ve asked other than ”.. you’re stupid, but you knew that. “ and it’s obvious there will be none.

And I solemnly swear to never darken another Kansas anti thread again.

There’s nobody on Bowsite that can change Kansas laws. What is KBA doing to convince Kansas residents a change is needed? You need numbers and Persuasion with Kansas residents.

To rely on Non-Residents will not work. If you make some progress and need help from NR’s let us know and those that support will help but nothing will happen unless you convince your Residents.

I've posted links here before, but little response. Blame it on me I guess?

You know you can't make things happen without support.

I doubt any of the people in power know that corn is poisoning deer and other wildlife. THAT is a strong position. Killing deer with corn should get someone's attention. That's a serious deal

We are lucky in Texas. Our corn is not poisonous. If it was I would be the first to lobby to get rid of it for deer or whatever it is poisoning

Good luck to you guys. Serious problem for sure

I may look into a lawyer that might help you with the poison corn. He is a good one. East coast but a bull dog. Big time hunter and he will not like hearing that your deer are being poisoned. I'll let you know.

While you're at it, enlighten me as to the CWD regs in TX...things are changing. Keep your head buried, keep making that "gold", it's all about you.

Get a grip. You are not the end all on the subject. I've probably forgotten more about CWD than you ever knew

Relax dude, working together is the cure or some answer in dealing with all of this

Stop trying to be some hero for the cause

No need to try and pander, that's transparent, you do you...I choose to hunt.

I have done this for 40 years. How old are you SitO?? You have zero, no idea what I want.

What's laughable is that you think I want anything

I'm way past That. I have no idea what Forest wants Why would I. Why would I care?

You are so insecure in your position that you can't even communicate . Sad dude, way sad. And that crushes your credibility

What do you want and what do you think you need to accomplish your mission. Bet you cannot communicate that.

Does not matter. You are one of a hundred through the years that had a plan to fix the hunting community. None did it because they could not communicate. Your are the same Nothing new

I can't tell if you're asking me out, or trying to vet me for some clandestine "order of the hand"?

Good luck and great successes. Look forward to meeting you next year

https://www.ksnt.com/kansasoutdoors/what-are-the-downsides-of-baiting-feeding-practices-in-kansas-biologists-weigh-in/

This one is from the NIH National Institute of Health:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8388532/#:~:text=However%2C%20baiting%20wildlife%20can%20alter,competition%2C%20and%20susceptibility%20to%20predation.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8388532/#:~:text=However%2C%20baiting%20wildlife%20can%20alter,competition%2C%20and%20susceptibility%20to%20predation.

"Our findings of an effect of bait on third-order selection support previous work indicating that baiting can increase deer-to-deer contact rates [18]. Increased contact rates could ultimately lead to higher transmission rates of diseases in susceptible areas [40,41]. Direct contact between deer is not uncommon in natural settings where bait sites are not present; however, these behaviors are typically associated with small social groups [42,43]. Short-term baited surveys, such as the Jacobson et al. [5] survey, also require continual bait replenishment over time at a single location where a camera is present, likely exacerbating contamination levels [18]."

In addition to providing assessments of both second- and third-order selection, SCR models yield estimates of home range size as well as abundance, which is a primary objective of many camera surveys. At all sites, the spatial scale parameter (?) associated with home range size was approximately two times larger in the winter than in the summer, consistent with the studies reviewed by Marchinton and Hirth [43]. From their work in agricultural landscapes, Nixon et al. [29] and Brinkman et al. [44] reported that deer home ranges were more than twice as large in the winter than in summer. In our study area in southwestern Georgia, reduced home range size during the summer is likely the result of greater cover and forage than in the winter.

Baiting has become a contentious issue in deer management as it has the potential to impact behavior, harvest susceptibility and disease transfer. Although there are many mechanisms by which bait may influence deer populations, most research has focused on the effects of bait on selection at a single spatial scale. Our work presents a framework for assessing the influence of bait on multiple spatial scales, and we have demonstrated that the effects may differ between spatial scales."

DEER MANAGEMENT ISSUES BAITING / SUPPLEMENTAL FEEDING A. DISEASE 1. In Michigan, where bovine Tuberculosis (TB) exists in wild deer and elk, scientists believe that the maintenance of bovine TB in white-tailed deer is directly related to supplemental feeding/baiting and the increased focal densities these practices create (Schmitt et al. 1977). The unnatural circumstances of supplemental feeding promote inhalation of bovine TB bacteria or consumption of feed contaminated with the bacteria from animals coughing and exhaling (Schmitt et al. 1997). 2. Although it is difficult to attribute the spread of disease to deer density alone, some disease problems occur more commonly in areas of high density (Eve 1981), such as might occur with baiting. 3. The evidence that deer baiting causes the spread of diseases is well documented (McCaffery 2000, Mich. DNR 1999). 4. Large quantities of grain, or the sudden ingestion of feed high in carbohydrates without acclimation results in acidic conditions in a deer's rumen (stomach). This kills the bacteria necessary for digestion and causes bloating, diarrhea, enteritis, and in extreme cases death. The visible affects on deer include lameness, arthritis, and a decrease in appetite (Lyons 2000). This condition reportedly occurs yearly in Michigan (Mich. DNR 1999). During a severe winter in Saskatchewan 30% of the deer found dead near cattle feedlots were diagnosed with lactic acidosis (Wobster and Runge 1975). Deer have been found dead and suffering due to this condition in Wisconsin, but the widespread affect is not known (Langenberg 2001). 5. Tuberculosis, a bacterial disease of the respiratory system, can be injurious to deer, cattle and humans (Hyde 1998, Schmitt et al. 1997). 6. Aflatoxin are extremely toxic chemicals produced by two molds, Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus, which are widely associated with moldy corn. Aflatoxins can lower deer reproduction and cause mortality of wild turkey, quail, songbirds and mourning doves (Davis 1996). 7. Despite supplemental feeding, wildlife populations may exhibit poor physical condition and experience malnutrition if their numbers grow to exceed the amount of nourishment provided by the supplemental food. As examples, white-tailed deer on Long Island in Lake Winnespesaukee, New Hampshire, and on Monhegan Island, Maine, were in much poorer condition than mainland deer, even though both island deer populations were supplementally fed by residents (Lavigne and Dumont 1996, Weber 1997). Supplemental feeding does not prevent malnourishment - it just increases the population size at which malnourishment occurs (Pekin and Tarr 1997). 8. Perhaps the best cumulation of arguments against supplemental feeding was most recently produced by the Wildlife Management Institute (Williamson 2000). In this easily readable and well-referenced brochure, Scott Williamson, formerly a biologist in Texas, states, "When and where such feeding is done, it is undertaken only, if not expressly-for the interest of people, because fed animals almost invariably will not benefit and will very likely be harmed by the practice." 9. The provision of food to wildlife has been implicated widely as a causative factor that increases the occurrence of infectious disease. Animals are attracted to artificial sources of feed in higher density than normally occurs under natural conditions (Thorne and Herriges 1992, Williams et al. 1993, Fischer et al. 1997). As animal density increases, competition for food also increases resulting in more frequent contact among individuals (Baker and Hobbs 1985, Schmitt et al. 1997). Contact can be direct through physical contact, or indirect as occurs when two animals share the same portion of food. If one or more animals are harboring an infectious organism or prion, its transmission to uninfected individuals is facilitated by the increased frequency of contact among animals congregating at the feeding site (Miller et al. 1998, Michigan Bovine TB Eradication Project 2002). It is also suggested stress from crowding reduces immunocompetence in some animals, increasing the likelihood of disease (Smith and Roffe 1994, Smith 2001). Disease can affect individual animals, populations, or communities. Depending on the nature of the disease and the feeding location, disease can be transmitted within or between species (Schmitt et al. 1997, Smith 2001), between wildlife and domestic animals (Thorne and Herriges 1992), or even between wildlife and humans (Rupprecht et al. 1995). Non-infectious disease also can occur when wild species are fed foods incompatible with their digestive function (Wobster and Runge 1975), foods of poor nutritional quality (Ohio Wildlife Center 2000), or spoiled foods that have become toxic (Perkins 1991, Davis 1996, Breed 2002). 10. High concentrations of deer around feeding and baiting sites facilitate disease transmission through increased animal-to-animal contact and possibly through contamination of feed (Palmer et al. 2001, Schmitt et al. 2002). 11. In Fort Collins, Colorado, artificial feeding by private citizens is believed to have contributed to the infection of 49 free-ranging cervids with chronic wasting disease (Spraker et al. 1997). Experimental and circumstantial evidence suggests infected animals probably transmit the disease through animal-to-animal contact, and through contamination of food or water sources with body fluids (saliva, urine) and feces (Williams and Young 1980, Miller et al. 1998) Further, conditions of high animal density or confinement can create conditions where transmission of CWD occurs at a faster rate than under natural conditions (Miller et al. 2000). 12. White-tailed deer receiving artificial feed in Maine have suffered from outbreaks of demodectic mange caused by the spread of mites while at feeding stations (Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife 2002, see www.state.me.us/ifw/hunt/deerfeed.htm). 13. Winter feeding of white-tailed deer can lead to starvation of some individuals if the feeding delays the migration of deer to their winter yards, or if artificial feeding is terminated abruptly (Ozoga and Verme 1982). 14. Recent epidemiological research suggests that baiting and feeding of deer enabled the TB outbreak in Michigan to persist and spread and that declines in TB prevalence were associated with a ban on baiting and feeding (O'Brien et al 2002).

Charlie, quite a few Bowsiters and KBA members have spoken up at commission meetings, informational forums, and through emails, calls, etc. on this the last few years. You know from your involvement in P&Y a club isn’t going to take a unified stance on this sort of topic though. It would alienate half their membership. Forest can keep throwing out wild guesses as to how many folks bait in Kansas, but I mentioned above, before most of the real discussions began the state included a baiting question in a CWD survey and only 54% of the respondents said they’d oppose a ban. With the meetings/information provided last year I’d be interested to see what that number is now. I think it’s fair to say, outside of Bowsite, the Kansas pro baiting crowd is much louder than those who’d like to see a change, but maybe isn’t the overall majority these days.

Bowfreak/Buckdeer, Kansas has some excellent biologists, many of which have spent the last year or two outlining the potential affects bait sites have on all sorts of wildlife and habitat. The department banned baiting on public lands over a decade ago now and started posting info about harmful affects as many as four years ago I believe. They angled last year’s discussions and debates as an informational process to educate the public on those affects. The commission even admitted they’d like to ban it at one point last year, but they know as soon as they go forward the state government will step in and attempt to override it. They didn’t even get it to a point of taking a vote and we’re already seeing state legislators launching an attack at the department this winter after threats that they would gut their funding if they continued to explore it. Those informational meetings that were supposed to continue throughout the state have not so mysteriously ceased. The biologists and commission have essentially been handcuffed by private interest on the matter. If it was only about the science and doing what’s best for wildlife in Kansas it would’ve been done away with long ago.

Hard to argue with your stance Buckdeer, if this was a one specie/one disease issue. As has been outlined by many above and in great detail in the video Kyle shared everyone is very aware that it’s not just about deer and not just about CWD. Hell, your ability in your home state to kill more than one turkey a year and half the available season have recently been lost. I said above a couple times I don’t think baiting is the specific and only reason for a turkey decline, but if the biologists tell us hens are more susceptible to predation at feed sites, their nests are less likely to succeed in the presence of feed sites and there is the potential for disease complications, maybe more seriously for birds than deer, also at feed sites, when would we get on board with removing feed sites? After your ability to hunt turkeys in Kansas disappears completely? Even if it’s not the explicit reason they’re in decline how many more hens can you afford to lose all in the name of enjoying the “pursuit”/monitoring of big antlers? Same goes for pheasants. Habitat, drought, maybe disease as well, all play a role. But in those remaining pieces of habitat where birds are still hanging on how many hens, chicks and nests are an acceptable casualty so that folks can still carry on with their deer feeding? Is there a number out there for a surplus of hens that don’t matter when populations are already in decline? Or are deer, and more specifically antlers, just that much more important than these other species we just need to live with the consequences?

Frankly I don’t give a damn about CWD as it relates to baiting. It’s going to sweep through the state no matter what precautions are taken. Folks in the eastern part of the state will deal with it at some point, unless it truly is a hoax like some of them proclaim I suppose. This might be a little tinfoil hattish I suppose but I’m far more concerned with the if and when of it jumping to cattle and causing an isolated mad cow outbreak. There won’t be a deer left in the country to worry about baiting anyway. Time will tell. Having wasted your time with that, CWD and the social/hunting tactic aspects of baiting are quite a ways down the list for me. Forest can keep running with the typical Bowsite “you guys are just jealous” mantra and/or “God given/private property rights” drivel, but it’s simply not the case. Some of us care about more than antlers and just ourselves.

Buckdeer is 100% correct in that there are a couple of lawmakers in the state that have threatened funding to Wildlife Departments and have introduced bills to cut their funding. They are making good on their threats. It's self serving and dirty. Our biologists are highly hamstrung due to politicians.