The state of Mississippi recently approved a law that will allow hunters to shoot deer over a baited field. Of course this comes with some controversy as it delves into the ethics of the sport. This morning in the Clarion Ledger online, a reader submits an opinion piece in that regard.
Who’s to blame for the baited-field deer “hunting?”
“Hunting” deer over a baited field is for sissies, of course.
So the greatest share of the blame goes to the true sportsmen of the state who let it happen.
No pride.
Then the idiots we have elected to the Legislature have their share of blame. No courage.
Since no “real” man would participate in a “hunt” over a baited field, we now have a quandary. If you see a trophy deer head hanging in someone’s den, how do you know if he is a true sportsman or a sissy?
It becomes, therefore, appropriate to ask any “hunters” with a trophy deer head whether they wear pink, lavender or chartreuse panties underneath all that camo disguise.
The true sportsmen in Mississippi need to fix this.
I can certainly understand the frustration expressed by the writer of this piece but let’s take a closer look at the issue. The baiting bill in Mississippi, allows the fish and game commission to regulate baiting. At first a bill was proposed that would allow pretty much any type of baiting for deer. This bill is said to be a compromise from the original.
From this perspective, I can see that having the authority to regulate deer baiting, would give the commission another tool to effectively manage the deer population. If the commission decided there were too many deer and that if baiting could be used effectively to reduce that population, then I guess you could say it was useful.
But there are downsides to the baiting issue aside from an ethics point of view which I’ll look at in a moment. It is surmised that when deer or other ungulates congregate in masses, the chances for the spread of diseases such as chronic wasting disease, increases. Allowing for baiting of deer, no matter how the baiting is done, could promote the spread of that disease and others like Lyme.
Hunting ethics is quite a different story. For those of you who read my blog regularly, you know that I believe that hunting ethics should not be legislated. That isn’t to say that ethics shouldn’t be taught and within the law. Ethics is a personal thing usually passed down from father to son during our growing up years.
Here’s an example of what I mean. Growing up, deer venison was a necessary thing for my family. As a kid, I recall eating venison at least 3 nights out of the week and sometimes for breakfast as well. I grew up poor and between my father and my three older brothers, having more than one deer in the freezer was a God send.
Living this way forced us, with instructions from my Dad, to “meat hunt”. This meant that we took whatever was available to us at the time. Also understand that growing up and hunting in Maine, you didn’t go out and see several deer each day. Most of the time you were lucky to see several deer in an entire season. When you had a shot at a deer, you took it.
I can also say that my father or any of us boys, never took a deer illegally but I can assure you that if it had been a matter of need, there would have been venison in the freezer.
There are many hunters today, who still hunt this way. They are meat hunters and the need is there. I have heard many an argument over the years that there is no reason why anyone would hunt these days when there is plenty of food in the grocery stores. Those who make those statements, do so out of ignorance. They need to get out into the real world where people in many rural locations rely on game and gardens for survival.
On the other side of the coin, there are also many hunters who believe that hunting for meat is not in the true sense of the sport of hunting. Some have even gone so far as to call it unethical. Some hunters refuse to shoot female deer because those deer produce the offspring that will continue to provide a population of deer.
So you see much of what we discuss in conversations dealing with ethics is all part of background. There are obvious issues that result in laws to protect the management of the game. Poaching is one of those. Without seasons and limits to the hunts, it would be nearly impossible to manage game animals effectively. History has shown us what can result from unchecked killing of game. Such laws are necessary for that purpose.
Some states ban the use of baiting, not so much because they view it as an ethics issue but because it makes for the taking of deer easier. In states with a balanced or a sparse population, baiting would be detrimental to the herd.
Ethics and hunting is really in the eye of the beholder. When I speak of these ethics, I am referring to all methods employed that are within the law. To legislate ethics for the mere reason to prevent someone from doing something you don’t approve of is not right. To make a law that will effectively protect the game animals we hunt, is necessary and prudent.
So, what is baiting anyway? Good question. When most people think of baiting deer, they envision salt licks, piles of grain or apples. They picture a hunter sitting in a tree stand looking down on this pile of fine dining and waiting for a deer to come and eat so he can shoot it.
While I have to agree that that is baiting, we have to ask about other forms of baiting and where to draw the line with such. There’s an organization in this country called Quality Deer Management. This group advocates for the growing of food plots for deer. They encourage hunters to take an active role in managing the deer on their own land or the land they lease for hunting.
These food plots contain certain kinds of plants that are healthy for the deer and provide the right nutrients to grow bigger deer with larger antlers. In some states, this tactic is illegal but in most it’s not. In all fairness to the discussion of hunting ethics, we have to ask ourselves, isn’t this deer baiting? With these food plots, often times it is not illegal to sit in a blind or a stand and shoot the deer you’ve been growing all year long or for several years, when they come to the plot to eat.
What else is baiting? Many hunters will scout out game trails before the season. They learn the deer’s habits, particularly those of the bucks. They find scrapes and pawings and get their tree stands our ground blinds built in time before the start of the season so any deer become accustomed to any changes in the landscape.
On that given day when the hunter arrives at the stand, they often bring with them scents and lures that they hope will attract a rutting buck. Sometimes they dump this on the ground and spray it all around the area. They might hang scent tubes and boxes from trees nearby. They then retreat to their place and wait for the buck to arrive. Isn’t that baiting?
Along with the scents, the hunter while waiting, uses tactics such as rattling deer antlers. This is employed to imitate two sparring bucks which is a natural event that occurs when two male deer are fighting over the rights to mate with an estrous doe. It has been learned that when other bucks hear that sound, their curiosity draws them to it. Isn’t that baiting?
If not rattling horns, hunters may be using instruments that will mimic the sounds made by other deer. They practice the sounds made by both the doe and the buck while mating or in the process that leads up to mating. They also mimic sounds of a fawn that might draw in other does, which might in turn lure bucks. Isn’t this baiting?
Baiting can be defined as any method used to lure a deer into a prescribed area. That area is where you the hunter sit and wait in ambush. Any tactic used to achieve those desired results has to be defined as baiting. So where do we draw the line? Or do we? Who decides?
We can carry the ethics debate that much farther and ask a lot of other questions. Take a look at the technology that now exists in the sport of hunting. There’s such things as clothing that covers up the scent of man underneath. The odor that man emits that can easily be detected by deer, has been likened to deer in the same fashion as man detects the odor of a skunk - pungent and easily recognized.
The weapons we use have been questioned and the features we can add to them. Some hunters have even questioned whether the use of GPS is ethical or scopes for a rifle. I know hunters who believe using a rifle for deer hunting is not right.
Are tree stands ethical? They have them now that are easy to carry and simple and fast to get up into a tree. Does this give hunters an unfair advantage? Does this “dumb down” the sport as some have called it?
I can add to this list forever but what items on that list you employ, is really up to you. Your hunting methods are what you are comfortable with. Again being that all are within the law.
I am not completely attune as to why Mississippi has decided to make baiting, in the sense of luring to piles of grain, etc., a part of their legal methods of taking deer. I do know that state has a burgeoning deer population.
So, before you go calling hunters who use bait sissies and not true sportsmen, take a minute to look at all the things you do, first. Take the time to educate yourself about the reasons some hunters do what they do and from what areas of the country they grew up in and under what circumstances. If you find certain methods of hunting offensive then talk to a friend and explain to them the reasons you feel that way, while being receptive to their explanations as well.
Tom Remington
deer baiting,
hunting ethics,
Mississippi Fish and Game,
Quality Deer ManagementIf you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Hunters and others should be aware of the symptoms they may find on deer suffering from the disease.