Home › Forums › Campfire Forum › Garbaging for Bears
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
Apparently this is a big issue in Ted’s home state of Maine. Posted here as food for thought and creative defensiveness; have at it …
-
He makes some very good points. We talk alot about the ethics of baiting for deer but we don’t often address baiting for bears. It’s good food for thought. Why is one acceptable and another taboo? Baiting for deer and bear is the primary technique for most hunters here in northern Wisconsin, which in itself is sad. I used to do it myself. When I switched to trad gear, I quit hunting with bait for deer. Perhaps I will have to seriously consider doing the same the next time I draw a bear tag? As he said, where’s the chase?
I like that! Good post, David!
-
Good post Dave. I have never hunted bears and one reason why is that I don’t get hunting over bait. It just does not appeal to me and certainly does not seem like hunting. We all hunt over a food source, but finding there natural food source at the specific time of year is part of the challenge. That’s hunting and of course requires some level of woodsman ship. Another favorite topic.
-
I’m not going to get into a whole thing with this but this is a ridiculously one-sided and misleading essay. The idea that feeding bears in a wilderness setting makes them “problem” bears in the future has been disproven entirely. If you don’t believe it, I urge anyone to read both of Ben Kilham’s books on black bears.
He also compares hunting bears by spot and stalk in Colorado to doing the same in Maine. That premise is laughable. Maybe you haven’t seen what a boreal forest looks like but you are not going to do much bear hunting up there without the use of bait or hounds. I spoke to our lion guides in Idaho about baiting and they hated it. They said it was so much easier to just glass and stalk one. That aint happening up in the sever Northeast so if they do want a certain harvest, they are going to have to use one of the two above mentioned tactics.
I’ve hunted bears over bait fifteen times in Canada and have been doing it by spot and stalk and “stand” hunting here in GA for three. I like both of them and will continue to hunt GA every season for them. I’d love to go back to Canada and do it again as well. To be honest, I see A LOT more bears hunting here in GA spot and stalk than I ever did over bait. In all those years, I only killed four
I understand it is not everyone’s cup of tea. Baiting deer is now legal here but I don’t do it. It’s just not for me, but if somebody wants to kill a bear, and experience the eery beauty of the north woods, there is really only one way to do it.
-
Based on what I’m seeing in Wall Mart, baiting deer must be legal here. I don’t see why. Fields are full of left over corn, and the hay fields are still green. That’s where I will be tomorrow. Why spend the money at Wall Mart? On the other hand, am I hunting over bait when I sit at a stand where the deer come into the hay field? This isn’t a “natural” food source (neither are the apple orchards). When I got my license I paid the extra $5 for a bear tag, but doubt I will actually go looking for a bear. The one I saw last year ranges over three townships, where he is at any given point in time is anybody’s guess, and he is the only bear in those three townships. I don’t see how anyone could/would actually plan a hunt for a bear without considering a food source, and tend to think the food source is going to be gut piles from deer kills. Too frugal (not cheap frugal) to buy bait when it is all over the place anyway.
-
grumpy wrote: Based on what I’m seeing in Wall Mart, baiting deer must be legal here. I don’t see why. Fields are full of left over corn, and the hay fields are still green. That’s where I will be tomorrow. Why spend the money at Wall Mart? On the other hand, am I hunting over bait when I sit at a stand where the deer come into the hay field? This isn’t a “natural” food source (neither are the apple orchards). When I got my license I paid the extra $5 for a bear tag, but doubt I will actually go looking for a bear. The one I saw last year ranges over three townships, where he is at any given point in time is anybody’s guess, and he is the only bear in those three townships. I don’t see how anyone could/would actually plan a hunt for a bear without considering a food source, and tend to think the food source is going to be gut piles from deer kills. Too frugal (not cheap frugal) to buy bait when it is all over the place anyway.
Everyone is different in their tactics and it is a slippery slope as far as I see on these issues. I detest the practice of baiting deer in GA. It is completely unnecessary and it makes people even lazier. The next generation will not even know how to hunt anymore. Having said that, if I lived in some sort of ridiculous monoculture like south florida, I don’t know how you could ever see a deer without it. That is the way I feel about bear baiting in the northern states and canada. Without hounds, mountain lions are essentially un-huntable (with any reasonable chance of success). Even if you disagree with the practice, to me, these are necessary means of managing wildlife. Be sure of it, wildlife managers are what we are now. The removal of hounding in states like California and Oregon is a HUGE mistake and a travesty for the generations of people that have hunted that way.
In my wildlife techniques class, we were asked to write an in depth essay on a recent wildlife bio decision and choose a side. I wrote about the removal of Ontario’s spring bear hunt. The implications of that were unreal from both wildlife and socioeconomic perspectives.
Years ago, California protected cougars, now more “nuisance” cougars are killed than ever were during the years when they allowed hounding. Not to mention the amount of money that now goes into dealing with those situations.
Dangit!!! You got me on the tangent I didn’t want to be on! But come on Dave, PETA could have written that article.
Time for a cold beer and some wings. Enjoy your night boys. Didn’t see a deer tonight.
-
I have to respectfully disagree here etter. I live in northern arboreal forest as well and I have enough encounters with bears during the course of a season to justify considering hunting them without bait. IMO this boils down to self interpretation of what is fair chase. Baiting for deer is legal in places and if one chooses to hunt over bait, so be it. Baiting for bear is legal in places as well and if one chooses to hunt them that way, again, so be it. But I don’t think one should hide behind the guise of not being successful to justify it? We hunt for many other species on this forum and report a large percentage of those hunts as unsuccessful yet still fulfilling. What is the hunt really about? Is the satisfaction species specific? I don’t know what the success numbers are or the ratios or each states specific laws. What I do know is I’m working every day to become a better outdoorsman and pit my skills against my intended quarry. And for me, hunting without bait, might just make a tag sandwich taste just a little bit better at the end of a well spent season.
Again, this is just my opinion. And it comes from someone who has spent many a day over baits in the past. I don’t condemn them. I have just chosen not to use them anymore. Until I read the article, I myself hadn’t even considered NOT hunting bear without bait. Now, I just might.
-
dfudala wrote: I have to respectfully disagree here etter. I live in northern arboreal forest as well and I have enough encounters with bears during the course of a season to justify considering hunting them without bait. IMO this boils down to self interpretation of what is fair chase. Baiting for deer is legal in places and if one chooses to hunt over bait, so be it. Baiting for bear is legal in places as well and if one chooses to hunt them that way, again, so be it. But I don’t think one should hide behind the guise of not being successful to justify it? We hunt for many other species on this forum and report a large percentage of those hunts as unsuccessful yet still fulfilling. What is the hunt really about? Is the satisfaction species specific? I don’t know what the success numbers are or the ratios or each states specific laws. What I do know is I’m working every day to become a better outdoorsman and pit my skills against my intended quarry. And for me, hunting without bait, might just make a tag sandwich taste just a little bit better at the end of a well spent season.
Again, this is just my opinion. And it comes from someone who has spent many a day over baits in the past. I don’t condemn them. I have just chosen not to use them anymore. Until I read the article, I myself hadn’t even considered NOT hunting bear without bait. Now, I just might.
I’m glad for you and that may be so for somebody who lives there and enters those woods daily. I don’t know where you live but I doubt you live in central Quebec. I don’t think you would regularly see bears on foot if you did.
My interpretation may be a cop out. I don’t know, and I’m as far from perfect as perfect gets, but I do respect management practices of our natural resources. My degree is in wildlife biology and I suppose that I take a lot of my opinions from my field. I also grew up bear baiting. I killed a bear when I was 12 years old. Did it before I killed a deer too.
I’m sure I am biased but I hate to see hunting attacked by hunters when (I guess what I consider) fair chase is involved. Hounding and baiting are at the forefront of this but there are a lot of others. I guess I would like to see those of us who oppose it do it in person first. Lugging thousands of pounds of “bait” from PA to Central Quebec and doing all of your own baiting for a week is not as easy as it sounds. Neither is training a pack of actual hound dogs and seeing some die at the paws of bears and lions. There are incredible amounts of time, effort, and sacrifice involved in all of these types of hunting and sometimes we forget. I have a very good friend who hunts over corn all the time now in S GA. I have to admit that I don’t approve, but he spends over a grand a year now on his corn and I don’t have to. You know what else, he doesn’t kill any more deer than he used to either.
-
You may be right? If I was hunting in Quebec on foot for bear, I may not see any in weeks of hunting. And as I said, I do not condemn those who use legal and accepted practices to pursue game. I get very limited time to hunt due to the fact that I travel around the country for work. So baiting appealed to me and as I said, I did it for years. I am very familiar with hauling bait into the woods and I myself shot my one and only bear 4 years ago over bait. I realize that having an education in the field may make you a much more intelligent resource on this subject than I but I would like to think that in lieu of our being successful hunters and contributing to population management, mother nature still knows what shes doing and already has it figured out. We may weep for those creatures that starve during a long hard winter but that has been the way of things long before we got involved. So, are we managing for the well being of the species or for acceptable numbers for all? Beats me, but it’s a fun discussion.
-
dfudala wrote: You may be right? If I was hunting in Quebec on foot for bear, I may not see any in weeks of hunting. And as I said, I do not condemn those who use legal and accepted practices to pursue game. I get very limited time to hunt due to the fact that I travel around the country for work. So baiting appealed to me and as I said, I did it for years. I am very familiar with hauling bait into the woods and I myself shot my one and only bear 4 years ago over bait. I realize that having an education in the field may make you a much more intelligent resource on this subject than I but I would like to think that in lieu of our being successful hunters and contributing to population management, mother nature still knows what shes doing and already has it figured out. We may weep for those creatures that starve during a long hard winter but that has been the way of things long before we got involved. So, are we managing for the well being of the species or for acceptable numbers for all? Beats me, but it’s a fun discussion.
You may be right. Like I said, I’m biased and everyone is different. I just hope that nobody forms an opinion based on an essay like the one above.
-
My feelings on the subject are well known, and I am absolutely not going to get drawn into a bitter argument about something that is ultimately a personal decision. But I will share a funny story. Some years back I was speaking at a bowhunting event in the Midwest when two guys marched up to me with angry looks on their faces and told me they wanted to talk to me about bear baiting. “You and your friends think it’s so terrible and unsporting,” one of them began, “but I want to tell you what it’s really like.” Turns out they regularly went to somewhere where it’s legal (Minnesota?) and put out baits in an area with a lot of bears. Every year their baits were hit regularly. “But the bears are so smart,” he explained,”that in five years we’ve never even seen one. Does that sound like easy hunting to you?” I asked him to describe the terrain, and he told me that in the evening the bears left the thick swamps where they bedded and traveled along narrow fingers of timber to reach crop fields where they fed. I asked him if they’d ever tried waiting for a good wind and then still-hunting or taking a stand in one of those fingers at the right time of day. “Oh,” he replied. “That would never work!” Point being that they were so convinced bait was the only way to hunt bears that they were unwilling to consider any alternatives even though they hadn’t seen a bear over their baits in five years. I think there is a lesson there. Don
-
grumpy wrote: Based on what I’m seeing in Wall Mart, baiting deer must be legal here. I don’t see why. Fields are full of left over corn, and the hay fields are still green. That’s where I will be tomorrow. Why spend the money at Wall Mart? On the other hand, am I hunting over bait when I sit at a stand where the deer come into the hay field? This isn’t a “natural” food source (neither are the apple orchards). When I got my license I paid the extra $5 for a bear tag, but doubt I will actually go looking for a bear. The one I saw last year ranges over three townships, where he is at any given point in time is anybody’s guess, and he is the only bear in those three townships. I don’t see how anyone could/would actually plan a hunt for a bear without considering a food source, and tend to think the food source is going to be gut piles from deer kills. Too frugal (not cheap frugal) to buy bait when it is all over the place anyway.
Hey Grumps,
I’ll be hunting in Mass next week, so I checked the regulations. Baiting for bear and deer is prohibited in Mass.
-
Well IMHO Don hit the target dead center–it is a personal decision and if it’s legal in your state—. But then you have to define hunting, and the fair chase mantra is different in some states. So the key word is Hunting. I personally, prefer the fly rod over buying cod.
Dave–thanks for the grenade–stimulation is good for the Psyche.
Mike
-
Mike, I’m all over that fly rod. But I admit that when we are at our Alaska home the catch and release principle vanishes in the face of halibut. Don
-
One thing that is extremely frustrating to me on my private property here in NE Arkansas is the lack of deer on my property when I do not bait. This is particularly true when hard mast is scarce such as this year. I own 130 acres and all of my neighbors bait in the fall during deer season. It is really sad because I’m almost certain that we are recovering from an outbreak of CWD which as most are aware is spread easily in mass concentrations of deer such as at baiting locations. I have noticed a substantial decline in the deer population in the last couple of years. I personally have no desire to harvest a bear but here in Arkansas the bear seasons are quota hunts and 99.9% of these hunts are either in the White River National Refuge which contains thousands of acres of mature bottomland timber where baiting is not allowed, or in the Ozark mountain region where I would say 99.9% of those bears are killed over bait. Much like North Georgia the mountainous forests of the Ozarks would be difficult to spot and stalk. When Frederick Gerstaker came to Arkansas in the 1840s as cited in his book “Wild Sports” he learned to hunt bear from the natives and backwoods frontiersmen who would wait until the bears went into their dens in winter and went in with torch, rifle, and Bowie knife. Of course they also hunted deer at night by building a fire on a dirt packed scaffold near a natural salt lick and sat underneath and awaited their approach. Unethical hunting is nothing new!
-
hunt1321 wrote: One thing that is extremely frustrating to me on my private property here in NE Arkansas is the lack of deer on my property when I do not bait. This is particularly true when hard mast is scarce such as this year. I own 130 acres and all of my neighbors bait in the fall during deer season. It is really sad because I’m almost certain that we are recovering from an outbreak of CWD which as most are aware is spread easily in mass concentrations of deer such as at baiting locations. I have noticed a substantial decline in the deer population in the last couple of years. I personally have no desire to harvest a bear but here in Arkansas the bear seasons are quota hunts and 99.9% of these hunts are either in the White River National Refuge which contains thousands of acres of mature bottomland timber where baiting is not allowed, or in the Ozark mountain region where I would say 99.9% of those bears are killed over bait. Much like North Georgia the mountainous forests of the Ozarks would be difficult to spot and stalk. When Frederick Gerstaker came to Arkansas in the 1840s as cited in his book “Wild Sports” he learned to hunt bear from the natives and backwoods frontiersmen who would wait until the bears went into their dens in winter and went in with torch, rifle, and Bowie knife. Of course they also hunted deer at night by building a fire on a dirt packed scaffold near a natural salt lick and sat underneath and awaited their approach. Unethical hunting is nothing new!
We dont hunt bear over bait in N Ga. Its not legal and it is easier to do it by hunting natural food. In the early season we work white oak ridges and stalk them while they are in trees.
Again, I didnt want to get into this as everyone’s values are their own but I just couldn’t stand to leave that essay unanswered.
Moth….. Meet Flame
-
Everybody quotes me, but nobody answered my question. When I was at a stand today in the middle of the hay field, right next to the corn field, was it baiting?
No, I didn’t see any deer, got rained out (cold and wet).
Would it be different if it was my field, and I planted it to attract deer?
And what town is that bear in?
BTW. I’ve gone deer hunting 4 times this season. Saw 2 deer (not close enough to see antlers). And, despite my age, this is my first season hunting deer.
-
grumpy wrote: Everybody quotes me, but nobody answered my question. When I was at a stand today in the middle of the hay field, right next to the corn field, was it baiting?
No, I didn’t see any deer, got rained out (cold and wet).
Would it be different if it was my field, and I planted it to attract deer?
And what town is that bear in?
BTW. I’ve gone deer hunting 4 times this season. Saw 2 deer (not close enough to see antlers). And, despite my age, this is my first season hunting deer.
Those are semantics and those are questions that you have to answer for yourself. Me, personally, I will not sit over a corn feeder and wait for a deer but I would sit over a food plot that was planted for the sole purpose of drawing deer. Am I a hypocrite? Yes, I am. Those are just my values. I feel the same way about bears. GA doesn’t allow bear baiting. Will I ever hunt bears over bait here? Nope. Will I do it in Canada? Maybe again.
We are all different.
-
I’m sorry etter but I gotta chew on this just a little more to help me understand. Maybe your background will help me a bit. In the case of wildlife management… When someone chooses to plant a food plot for the sole purpose of possibly harvesting 1 or 2 deer off it, while their plot has helped the health and survival of who knows how many more, has the plot been an effective management tool? I’m not trying to pick on you, seriously. This is a legitimate question because I have no education in this field and I want to understand the logic? I’m trying to compare it against what seems to me to be a common sense contradiction in thought? I’m probably missing something, I just don’t know what?
-
This is a difficult topic to find the correct position to stand on. Baiting is traditional in some areas and completely prohibited in others. Some areas lend themselves well to spot and stalk hunting and other areas do not, so different tactics have been developed. Approximately three years ago, the only way to legally hunt bears in my home province was at a registered bait site. Imagine, you could not legally spot and stalk. That law has changed, but likely contributed to an increase in the use, and popularity, of baits.
I think all hunting comes down to some form of baiting. For whitetails, we have all learned to position ourselves between bedding and feeding areas. We don’t put the food out, but we know where it is, where the deer travel and where to position our selves. That’s not baiting, but it is taking advantage of a deers stomach to increase our odds.
What about calling a moose? Now we are taking advantage of hormones to increase our odds. Should moose calling be banned because it definitely gives us a great advantage in getting a moose within range.
First, do what is legal within your area. Second, do what your own ethics tell you is correct for your hunting situation.
-
More good publicity for hunting …
http://news.yahoo.com/maine-bear-bait-vote-sparks-interest-around-us-133925342.html
-
dfudala wrote: I’m sorry etter but I gotta chew on this just a little more to help me understand. Maybe your background will help me a bit. In the case of wildlife management… When someone chooses to plant a food plot for the sole purpose of possibly harvesting 1 or 2 deer off it, while their plot has helped the health and survival of who knows how many more, has the plot been an effective management tool? I’m not trying to pick on you, seriously. This is a legitimate question because I have no education in this field and I want to understand the logic? I’m trying to compare it against what seems to me to be a common sense contradiction in thought? I’m probably missing something, I just don’t know what?
The issue I have with food plots is they are usually not native plants. I think, if you’re going to own and caretake a piece of land, then how about doing some habitat improvement, use native plants from your area, which the deer already eat! This year I was having a hell of a time finding acorns. My usual spots had none and there weren’t very many bears in those places. So I had to get out and hike some new country, great, just part of the hunt finding new spots.
Its interesting reading the comment section. Most folks are stuck in their paradigm, whether its anti or pro hunting, some are in the middle. It makes me pause and consider how my views and opinions are stuck… And if you can read the comments without getting drawn in, they are worth a laugh!
-
And now a dose of the real world effects of those decisions
-
Anonymous
November 5, 2014 at 8:59 pmPost count: 124colmike wrote: Well IMHO Don hit the target dead center–it is a personal decision and if it’s legal in your state—. But then you have to define hunting, and the fair chase mantra is different in some states. So the key word is Hunting. I personally, prefer the fly rod over buying cod.
Dave–thanks for the grenade–stimulation is good for the Psyche.
Mike
Agreed on all points. However, consider please that the Maine initiative was NOT supported by their wildlife officials, NOT brought by or supported by any conservation/hunting organization, and NOT funded from within the state. It was an HSUS initiative, conceived and funded from DC and NYC and SanFran. This is very similar to the same type of initiative that got the cougar hunting ban in California started many years ago. How well has that worked in that state?
Either we believe in the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and Management, or we do not. HSUS does not. Be very wary of any initiative they bring forward.
-
Yes HSUS was a supporter of this proposition. However, there are quite a few hunters and scientists supporting this as well. Many of them from Maine and bear hunters. The focus of this issue was on baiting because that is the most widely used method there, but it would have also prohibited snaring for bears. I think we can all agree shooting a bear in a foot snare is not fair chase.
Our hunting and fishing traditions need to be secured for our grandchildren’s grandchildren, but that does not mean we should allow any form of hunting. We need to clean up our act or we may lose all hunting privileges.
Anyway, this was defeated by Maine voters. Second time in 10 years.
-
What ptaylor said pretty well sums up my feelings. Extreme polarization and a bunker mentality are always the enemies of sound decision making. Sounds like folks up in Maine don’t much like their bears, or else only baiters vote.
-
David Petersen wrote: Extreme polarization and a bunker mentality are always the enemies of sound decision making.
A good thing for all of us to remember.
On a related note, Idaho Fish and Game recently shelved a proposal to require all bear bait contents in grizzly overlap zones to only contain “local and natural” contents. IDFG framed this proposed change as being a “safety” issue – insofar as bait sites have the potential to impact the safety of other backcountry users in the area.
Idaho BHA filed comments on this, after a spirited discussion in which many good and valid points were raised. But ultimately we agreed on these points:
– There is a legitimate safety issue with bait sites in grizzly overlap zones, esp. when they are not far from trails and/or other backcountry users are not aware of their proximity or location.
– There is no science that any of us are aware of that demonstrates that requiring “local and natural” bait content would do anything to increase those safety margins. A bait site is a bait site, and therefore a major attractant, by design – the bears don’t care whether it contains bacon grease and donuts, or local huckleberries and native trout.
– Allowing bear baiting in grizzly zones is completely inconsistent with what is required of every other backcountry user group. For example, if I’m merely backpacking in the area and I leave food out in camp, I can receive a hefty fine. Yet someone can have a barrel full of bait in the same area and be considered perfectly legal? If IDFG is going to do anything from a “safety” point of view on this issue, then what it should be doing is making baiting practices in grizzly zones consistent with what every other backcountry user group is required to do. In other words, don’t allow baiting at all in grizzly zones. This would only affect a very small portion of the state, and with the right framing and marketing, these zones could actually be touted as desirable “spot and stalk only” zones (they tend to have bigger black bears on average).
– At the same time, the notion that backcountry baiting creates “problem” bears that wander into the frontcountry is highly debatable. Personally, I think it’s BS. Bears are the ultiumate opportunists, and if there is a good food source easily available on a picnic table or your back porch, I think it matters little whether they were attracted to a bait site miles away on a previous occasion. That’s not a defense of bear baiting in general (which I’ll stay out of), but I think it’s also important that we stick to facts, rather than conjecture.
Ultimately, the proposed changes were shelved, not because of the above so much as a very vocal contingent of bear hunters came out in force to fight any changes to bear baiting practices in the state. Unfortunately, I think it’s going to take an ugly incident that is the direct result of a nearby baiting site in grizz habitat for this issue to be re-examined.
-
David Petersen wrote: What ptaylor said pretty well sums up my feelings. Extreme polarization and a bunker mentality are always the enemies of sound decision making. Sounds like folks up in Maine don’t much like their bears, or else only baiters vote.
Maybe people were voting based on the game management principles presented to them by wildlife biologists.
Perhaps they didn’t want to entirely remove the bear harvest which would, in essence, remove their deer and moose populations. I don’t know how many bears there are in Colorado. I assume that hunting and drought keep them pretty well in check, but I have seen what a huge hear population does to any cervid population. It removes it. Northeast GA used to be covered in deer. As the bear population expanded, the deer disappeared. In the last three years, I have seen 56 bears. I’ve seen 4 deer.
Perhaps you don’t realize that removing hounding and baiting in a place like Maine protects bears. 100 percent. Their harvest goes to nearly zero.
I doubt people would be so supportive of this if they started seeing their own deer, elk, moose, etc disappearing.
My Idaho lion guide told me that they cut open the stomachs of every bear they kill in the spring. Last year 25 or 26 bears had elk or deer hooves inside. I think people underestimate them as a predator.
-
Maine and CO are different states with different situations. Yet the issues and justification and fears you quote are so remarkable similar, consider please these well documented statistic facts (as opposed to hearsay and speculation):
Since Colorado banned baiting and hounding bears by ballot initiative in 1992, the annual number of bear hunters has risen, the annual number of bears killed by hunters has risen, and the annual average size of checked bears has increased amazingly … all of these gains gradually rising on a fairly steady upward curve across the years. Back then, also, the fans of the status quo, largely baiting outfitters and their clients, plus of course the predator-phobic agriculture community, and claimed the ballot initiative was the work of HSUS, but they didn’t come in until the last minute, after they saw it was going to win and wanted to grab credit. The movement was in fact started and overwhelming driven by concerned hunters including me, concerned nonhunters (not antihunters) and a few valiant Div. of Wildlife biologists and wildlife managers who had given up trying to use the system for change, since the system is political and ag-driven, ignoring rather than upholding establish research science. Everyone, including Tom Beck the leading black bear biologist in the West at the time and a dedicated bowhunter (see his “A Failure of the Spirit, p 200, in A Hunter’s Heart), finally, after years of effort, gave up attempting to convince the CO Wildlife Commission (political appointees, not professional wildlife managers, and always heavy on ranchers) to end baiting and hounding. Aside from being considered grossly unethical by many hunters and a 2/3 majority of the nonhunting public and thus shining a dirty light on all hunting (agreed to by P&Y and B&C) garbaging for bears and executing treed bears strongly favored selectively killing large males and consequently had driven the size of the average checked bear down to embarrassingly and biologically unsupportably low levels. In the end, hunters who had never hunted bear during the days of hounding and baiting took up the sport after the ban, explaining it was no longer a dishonorable activity. But I’ve said this all before, for example see “‘Brain-dead Political Hacks and other Friends of Wildlife’: Black Bear Management in Colorado,” p. 181 in Ghost Grizzlies.
-
David Petersen wrote: Maine and CO are different states with different situations. Yet the issues and justification and fears you quote are so remarkable similar, consider please these well documented statistic facts (as opposed to hearsay and speculation):
Since Colorado banned baiting and hounding bears by ballot initiative in 1992, the annual number of bear hunters has risen, the annual number of bears killed by hunters has risen, and the annual average size of checked bears has increased amazingly … all of these gains gradually rising on a fairly steady upward curve across the years. Back then, also, the fans of the status quo, largely baiting outfitters and their clients, plus of course the predator-phobic agriculture community, and claimed the ballot initiative was the work of HSUS, but they didn’t come in until the last minute, after they saw it was going to win and wanted to grab credit. The movement was in fact started and overwhelming driven by concerned hunters including me, concerned nonhunters (not antihunters) and a few valiant Div. of Wildlife biologists and wildlife managers who had given up trying to use the system for change, since the system is political and ag-driven, ignoring rather than upholding establish research science. Everyone, including Tom Beck the leading black bear biologist in the West at the time and a dedicated bowhunter (see his “A Failure of the Spirit, p 200, in A Hunter’s Heart), finally, after years of effort, gave up attempting to convince the CO Wildlife Commission (political appointees, not professional wildlife managers, and always heavy on ranchers) to end baiting and hounding. Aside from being considered grossly unethical by many hunters and a 2/3 majority of the nonhunting public and thus shining a dirty light on all hunting (agreed to by P&Y and B&C) garbaging for bears and executing treed bears strongly favored selectively killing large males and consequently had driven the size of the average checked bear down to embarrassingly and biologically unsupportably low levels. In the end, hunters who had never hunted bear during the days of hounding and baiting took up the sport after the ban, explaining it was no longer a dishonorable activity. But I’ve said this all before, for example see “‘Brain-dead Political Hacks and other Friends of Wildlife’: Black Bear Management in Colorado,” p. 181 in Ghost Grizzlies.
All well and good IN COLORADO. But you cannot honestly think for a single second that statistics like that could carry over to a place like Maine or Quebec. In fact, that has been proven to be 100 percent incorrect by the removal of the spring season in Ontario.
The world is much more stratified than you are making it to be.
-
I would invite any “out west” bear hunter to northern Michigan during the legal bear season (late September through early October) and demonstrate their “spot and stalk” methods when they can only see about 30 feet due to waist high ferns and golden rod. Michigan black bears do not follow established runways like whitetail deer.
-
Etter,
I completely agree with you that bears are predators, and more importantly where I live they are scavengers. By stealing deer kills from cougars, they force the cats to kill more deer.
But, when its not hunting season I’m out looking for bears in the thick jungle of coastal redwoods and shoulder high sword fern. And even in those tight habitats I still manage to get inside 20 yards of a few bears each spring. It is possible. I’m sure you know it is cause you’ve hunted bears far longer than I have.
And really to me its come down to one good quote, “Do we want to shoot bears, or do we want to hunt bears?” D. Thomas (italics added). I get that it takes a lot of physical labor to haul bait out all summer, but its not going to challenge me mentally. I’m chasing the hunt. I’m after the old skills. Following an animal trail to find it is a skill that can be mastered but takes years of practice. Same with spotting game hidden in the brush, or setting up a perfect ambush location, or stalking into stickbow range of wary prey. It just doesn’t get me off to sit over a pile of food brought into the bush.
You know, better than most of us Etter, that all you need to do is find a fall food source and the bears will be there.
-
Again, I have no desire to kick the hornet nest but I will share a few thoughts. The first rule in discussions of this sort is to keep the tone civil. You’ve done that, and I hope we can keep it that way. Perhaps we should be asking WHY HSUS became involved in the Maine issue. The answer is that these groups are smart and know that their efforts are most successful when they attack hunting at its weakest point, i.e. on issues that are the hardest for hunters to defend to the non-hunting public. That’s why their biggest successes have almost all involved hunting large predators with specific means that they could portray as unethical, cruel, or whatever. Those successes breed more success. And while I certainly recognize that bear habitat and hunting conditions vary wildly around the continent, the notion that you can’t hunt bears without bait becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you start with the assumption that it can’t be done, you’ll never learn how to do it. Bears are opportunistic omnivores, and the woods are one vast natural bait station to them. At any given time in any given place, they will be concentrated on specific food sources–spring forbs, winter-killed carcasses, salmon or suckers in streams, marine debris along the tide line, thorn apple, Oregon grape, whatever. Find the food source and you will find bears. But you gotta look. Don
-
I believe this boils down to the simple belief of what hunting really means. Baiting of any animal can not belong in the definition of hunting for the following reasons. To hunt means to pursue an animal within its natural environment acting without unnatural cause to act differently. Baiting changes the way an animal would act naturally and obviously makes an animal easier to kill but not to hunt. If your main objective is to just kill an animal than baiting is probably the way to go. If you really want to “Hunt” the animal then baiting is not hunting. Hunting is you against the animal in his natural environment. Baiting is Killing. I don’t see how the 2 are related.
-
Echoing what Don said about self fulfilling prophecies, it wasn’t that long ago people thought the idea of hunting big game with a bow and arrow was a ridiculous proposition. The point was well proven by pioneers in our sport.
So maybe the challenge has been set for some adventurous members of the forum. Prove the point, take a camera and write an article… or at least post a thread 😉
AND…
At the risk of accusing Mike of prematurely calling time of death, I happen to have a point that might be a little of playing devils advocate, but it feels like the argument has legs, so give it a chance!
So to be clear when we say baiting in this context we mean food baiting. Because baiting in a broader sense is pretty accepted practice, whether that’s the audio baiting of artificial calls or antler rattling, or the visual baiting of turkey and duck decoys. So I kind of feel like there’s something a little disingenuous about decrying food baiting but accepting the others. Obviously this argument takes no account of ecological effects of food baiting, just the ‘in principle’ side of the affair. ‘In principle’ I don’t see a big difference.
-
Arguing against baiting with those who do it, is like arguing against religion with the religious. In both cases the critics are disadvantaged by the politics of politeness. That is, while the religious person or baiter can argue their points endlessly–based on scripture or wildlife management etc.–without seeming to insult anyone else personally, to argue against a belief or activity always is interpreted as a personal attack. Logically, it’s an unfair system of discourse. How to separate criticism of an activity or belief from personal criticism of the people involved? Like others here have said, I believe “baiting is not hunting” is as close as we can get. And even there, there are exceptions. One gentleman who posts here (but not so far on this thread) has in past baited bears. He did so because he and his family are making a serious effort to live as independently as possible from the “industrial food grid.” They hunt, fish, garden and raise small livestock. When he was baiting bears it was for food, pure and simple. He did not boast about it here or anywhere and rarely spoke of it in private; he didn’t even consider it hunting. Rather, it’s like when circumstances have forced me the past two years to take a rifle out in early winter to get elk meat I was unable to get during bow season (weather, human interference, medical problems and surgery, etc.) … I don’t consider that hunting, certainly nothing to boast about, but simply shopping in the woods the most efficient way possible: utility, not sport. So–and here I’m risking unintended criticism of individuals but it’s a valid part of a fair and open discussion–the more a person boasts about killing bears over bait, esp. if that person spends a lot of money to travel and hires a professional baiter, the more I have to shake my head. So here again, as so often in hunting and life, the morality of what we do is shaped in large part by how we view and speak of the “accomplishment.” We can nitpick the debate to pieces with analogy, but baiting (yes, we’re talking food or food scents) of bears is not hunting. It’s not necessarily immoral, either … depending on why we do it and how we think and talk about it. I do know that the general nonhunting majority detests it, and the majority in the end will decide the fate of hunting.
-
David Petersen wrote: I do know that the general nonhunting majority detests it, and the majority in the end will decide the fate of hunting.
Apparently not in Michigan, and more recently Maine, where attempts by anti-hunters to ban baiting for bears has failed at the ballot box.
-
That last line brings the issue to the “bottom line” so to speak.
Jim
Interesting comments on calling and decoy’s, as a matter of fact my wife asked that same question a few days ago while watching a trad bow hunting video. And my comment was–well yes you could call it baiting–but it ain’t the same as spreading some foodstuff around—it takes a great deal of skill to call and decoy successfully, and therein lies the difference. Skill—something you have to work at–like shooting a trad bow.:D
Mike
-
J. — As I’ve stated before, some years ago here in CO, banning baiting and hounding of bears won by more than a 2/3 majority, the biggest in state history, and there was no real involvement by “antihunters” (who for many, seem to be defined as anyone who is against anything anyone might want to do and call it hunting). I have never been scared by the big bag antis, because I’ve had no reason to be. But I’m scared to death of what is happening to hunting, as it negatively impacts me personally. I grant it’s different in different regions. But the antis can’t shoot us unless we give them the ammo, as the majority nonhunting public is neutral. And that’s the core issue surrounding all fringe activities around hunting: do we want to persist and lose support, or give a bit and gain from it? Of course, when some 2/3 of Americans don’t give a hoot about the world they live in–don’t apparently care about anything, not just hunting–enough even to vote, then anything can and does happen and the rest of us are washed downstream with that dumb (in both meanings of the term)nonpartyicipating majority. If we don’t vote, we don’t count. I am glad I am old.
-
David,
While I appreciate and enjoy Colorado, what happens there is not necessarily reflective of the rest of North America, nor should it be. Just because the fine people of Colorado decide something does not mean everyone else needs to follow suit. These issues, like so many others, are regional. Colorado voted to ban bear baiting, Maine and Michigan voted to keep it, Who’s right? All three, and that’s the point.
-
j. well, I’m not sure that’s the point. In MD baiting for anything is illegal. And, from my experience when we as ethical hunters, with trad bow, condone behavior that can be confused by ANY as unethical–then we –as a group have an issue that needs this discussion. I would venture to say, given our deplorable voter turn out in any election ,and without a doubt, your electorate as well, that the comments above require some thought from all of us.
You MN and Mi folks way in.
Mike
PS. j-perhaps you could update your profile with picture and location. If not I will ignore subsequent posts.:D
-
colmike wrote: And, from my experience when we as ethical hunters, with trad bow, condone behavior that can be confused by ANY as unethical–then we –as a group have an issue that needs this discussion.
That’s a pretty broad scope and would cover literally everything up to and including hunting as a whole. With respect to the issue at hand (baiting for bears) the people of Maine just had that discussion. They agreed to keep it.
colmike wrote: PS. j-perhaps you could update your profile with picture and location. If not I will ignore subsequent posts.:D
You can already find my photo, profile, and location information on the main page, upper left hand corner under the heading “About Us” in the “Meet The Folks” link. I’m right between Denny and Connie. 😉
-
I live and hunt in North Central Ontario.
I’ve hunted my whole life in many areas of this province and I can say, without a doubt, hunting bears here without bait is like fishing without a hook !!
The notion of spot and stalk requires the ability to actually see more than 50 feet in any direction ( hence spot ) and much of the bush here is too thick for that !!
Not going to say it “can’t be done”, but to take away baiting would be to take away bear hunting here !
-
Archer,
How far do the bears travel to get to the bait sites? And do they usually stay near on bait site, or do they move between multiple baits never really consistently using one?
The reason I ask is, if they are consistently using one or a couple sites and not moving great distances, then they should also have consistent bedding areas. I’d think you could find these bedding areas and then either still hunt or ambush them.
-
I had to call up this thread and reread it top to bottom. A good discussion. I live and grew-up in PA where baiting has been illegal and unethical since I was a kid. That said the isles of sporting good stores are lined with bait. I don’t understand why the stuff can be sold if it’s illegal to use. Actually, I do understand. It’s about the money. Sounds like a lot of it has to do with the money in states that allow baiting. Outfitters are in business because baiting is legal. Question is, would the outfitters have gone into business if not for baiting being legal. False economy?
I’m not opposed to bear hunting, I just don’t do it. I’d love to give it a try sometime, but I’ll have to spend a good amount of time learning how to do it. I just can’t imagine sitting near a food dump being a good time. I also eat what I kill. I just hate the thought of feeding venison to my family that might be snacking on chemlawn. I don’t find the idea of feeding my family bear meat that was raised up on donuts and rotten, burgerworld meat any more appealing.
Again, I wasn’t brought up that way, so it’s hard for me to imagine baiting as hunting, but I have to say, I think that’s a good thing. I suppose we’re really talking religion and politics.
All the best, dwc
-
I’ve hunted the “bear woods” my whole life. Not always for bear, but hunted none the less. In those 30’ish years, i can only remember actually spotting a bear, in the woods, no bait, just stalking the woods….3 times !! Let me also add that I go hiking or stumping quite regularly(once or twice a week year round) and the 3 times in 30 years still stands !
The bears are here, in fact, their numbers have increased dramatically since the cancellation of the spring hunt some 15 years ago. I’m not going to begin to compare the different habitats from different regions but up here…. spot and stalk is just not a viable option for hunting bears !! In fact I challenge someone to come try it !!!!
I fully understand those who are against baiting…I don’t agree with them but I understand them. I just don’t think they fully understand what it would “truly” mean to ban it !
-
In Minnesota the annual kill on bears has been dropping for several years. And it is not because the population has dramatically dropped. Baiting is getting less effective because the bears have learned that baits are dangerous places in the day light. It has been stated on several occasions that people who spend a lot of time in the bear/deer woods deer hunting or walking do not see bears so baiting is the only viable option to kill one. My thoughts are if you are not hunting them you will not see them. No one here has said that spot and stalking them is easy. You must find the food source they are keying on that day and pursue them there. When they move you must move also.
Unfortunately the baiting mentality is working its way into deer hunting also. Baiting deer is illegal here but the ATV manufactures and the Firearms deer hunters in this state have pushed to make it legal for cross country travel with ATV’s on state forest lands from October thru December. Under the giess it is needed for game retrieval and stand maintenance. What it has started is a dramatic increase in illegal baiting. They build permanent stands on public lands also legal in Minnesota. When the forest changes and they do not see deer from the stands they start illegal baits and food plots. Why? Because they do not what to hunt deer, they want to kill a deer. The constant barrage of big racks being taken by prostaff deer harvesters on TV has lead to the mentality that big bucks are and should be easy. Step 1 plant a food plot. Step 2 set a stand. Step 3 Shoot Big Buck. Step 4 Take hero photo.
In the effort to make hunting politically correct we have introduced the term “harvesting a bear/deer” instead of hunting and killing a bear/deer. So now Joe Newbie Hunter thinks it should be simple as walking out to the garden and pulling a bunch of carrots. We are results orientated society and new hunters are lead to the believe if you spend hours/days in the woods and come home without a animal you have failed/wasted time. No value is given for the mental regeneration and satisfaction of the chase.
-
I think Fallguy pretty much reiterated my feelings about this. Sure, it’s a common thing to bait bears where it is difficult or, as some put it, impossible to hunt them, but is it hunting? Really hunting? I’m in the Poconos, NE Pennsylvania. We have a lot of bears here and some of the biggest in the world, thanks to ready availability of bird feeders and dumpsters, as well as good natural fool sources. Even with a healthy populations of bears, I very rarely see one in the woods. Bears have keen senses and are a tough animal to find, even if they are the biggest animal in the woods here. The traditional way of hunting bears here is to put on drives in swamps. Guys I know are now watching known trails and water sources. I think there’s a lot too it, but that makes it more of a hunt, not a reason to try to make it easier. If I do get a bear license in the future, I’ll be sure to know the odds are that I’m looking at a lot of good days in the woods, not a lot of filled tags.
I really want to say, “to each his own,” but I have trouble with this one. It just doesn’t seem right. It sure doesn’t seem like hunting. Best, dwc
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.