# Attention: all HB 277 input



## secondseason

Any and all input on HB277 should be posted in this thread.  Any threads started other than this one will be merged with this one to limit the amount of threads on the same subject.


----------



## fredw

The house approved HB 277 by a vote of 122-48.


----------



## General Lee

It was interesting to watch.


----------



## Randy

I'd just like to say I am sorry you guys in the south lost your rights to hunt.  But it is what happens when politicians get involved in stuff they know nothing about.

It should pass the senate just as easily.  They have been paid also.


----------



## secondseason

General Lee said:


> It was interesting to watch.



I thought so too.  I watched or listened most of the afternoon waiting on the vote and found the process very interesting.


----------



## fredw

General Lee said:


> It was interesting to watch.



General Lee, the legislative process is interesting and educational to watch.  I told someone once that it gives a whole new meaning to the term "march madness".


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> It should pass the senate just as easily.


Oh yea,it's all just formalities from here on............


----------



## birddog1

I am glad it passed I wish it was state wide.


----------



## General Lee

secondseason said:


> I thought so too.  I watched or listened most of the afternoon waiting on the vote and found the process very interesting.


Yea,some of the arguments both sides were throwing out sounded like they had been lifted from this forum..........


----------



## fredw

birddog1 said:


> I am glad it passed I wish it was state wide.


Assuming it becomes law, you can always join a lease in the southern zone and pour the corn if you desire.


----------



## General Lee

birddog1 said:


> I am glad it passed I wish it was state wide.


It's just a matter of time...........


----------



## secondseason

Randy said:


> I'd just like to say I am sorry you guys in the south lost your rights to hunt.  But it is what happens when politicians get involved in stuff they know nothing about.
> 
> It should pass the senate just as easily.  They have been paid also.



I'm not in the Southern zone, nor do I hunt there for anything other than hogs.  I can tell you that from hunting hogs over corn doesn't mean you have an easier time of hunting and it is certainly not "killing" just because there is corn there.


----------



## Randy

Kind of reminds you of the civil war.  A divided state.  The anti's should be able to pick us off pretty easy now that we are divided.  It will be interesting to see if those in the south will be happy with baiting now that they have it.


----------



## rex upshaw

What a joke. I can only hope that many landowners forbid this practice to the people they lease it out to.


----------



## TROY70

So what was the "Shaw Amendment" they were referring to?  I missed it.


----------



## secondseason

Randy said:


> Kind of reminds you of the civil war.  A divided state.  The anti's should be able to pick us off pretty easy now that we are divided.  It will be interesting to see if those in the south will be happy with baiting now that they have it.



It will be interesting to see how it goes.  

I bet leases will increase in price down there.


----------



## rex upshaw

secondseason said:


> I'm not in the Southern zone, nor do I hunt there for anything other than hogs.  I can tell you that from hunting hogs over corn doesn't mean you have an easier time of hunting and it is certainly not "killing" just because there is corn there.



If it's not easier, why do it?


----------



## Skyjacker

I think that Georgia Outdoor News, their website, and all of their employees should get a pat on the back for successfully pushing an agenda.


----------



## General Lee

rex upshaw said:


> What a joke. I can only hope that many landowners forbid this practice to the people they lease it out to.


Won't happen enough to make any impact..............


----------



## biker13

Disgusting!


----------



## Skyjacker

secondseason said:


> I'm not in the Southern zone, nor do I hunt there for anything other than hogs.  I can tell you that from hunting hogs over corn doesn't mean you have an easier time of hunting and it is certainly not "killing" just because there is corn there.



  whatever.


----------



## Randy

secondseason said:


> I'm not in the Southern zone, nor do I hunt there for anything other than hogs.  I can tell you that from hunting hogs over corn doesn't mean you have an easier time of hunting and it is certainly not "killing" just because there is corn there.



I beg to differ.  I have slated them over corn in Florida.  Even my Mother-in-law (74) killed three in one sitting with a crossbow she has never shot before.  Like shooting pigs in a barrel.


----------



## General Lee

TROY70 said:


> So what was the "Shaw Amendment" they were referring to?  I missed it.


It was not read aloud.The members were made aware that a copy had been placed on their desks.I would like to see it............


----------



## secondseason

rex upshaw said:


> If it's not easier, why do it?



That is the practice of the people I hunt with down there not mine.  It's not wham bam thank ya ma'am like some would believe.


----------



## General Lee

Skyjacker said:


> I think that Georgia Outdoor News, their website, and all of their employees should get a pat on the back for successfully pushing an agenda.


Don't blame GON,they just practiced good journalism and reported the facts


----------



## Randy

Skyjacker said:


> I think that Georgia Outdoor News, their website, and all of their employees should get a pat on the back for successfully pushing an agenda.



Agree and I hope hunters in the state will take that in to account.


----------



## huntfourfun

*Proper Corn Placement*

As a Southern Zone hunter, can those who have hunted over corn in the past please provide me with some ideas on proper corn placement?  Should it be in the middle of a field?  Near water?  Near bedding?  On the ground?  Trough type feeder?   

Thanks.......


----------



## TROY70

General Lee said:


> It was not read aloud.The members were made aware that a copy had been placed on their desks.I would like to see it............


Well I did not think so, but, about the time he mentioned it, my streaming came to a snails pace and I thought I had missed it...guess the snail stopped by my feeder.


----------



## gsubo

Sad day for the boys that grew up doing things the right way and learning how to hunt..


----------



## groundhawg

I was unable to watch the vote. Is there a way/list we can now view to see how each representative voted?

Thanks.


----------



## gacowboy

General Lee said:


> It's just a matter of time...........



You are correct, it will probably grow like Kudzu. It started with the 200 yard rule and now you will shoot on top of it. The question is how much will the kudzu grow, will the northern zone be next, spotlighting or shooting from the road....
Sad day for sure.


----------



## Randy

secondseason said:


> It will be interesting to see how it goes.
> 
> I bet leases will increase in price down there.



I bet there will be an influx of hunters to the north.  I may have to raise my lease rates.


----------



## Just 1 More

I'm a dealer for On tIME FEEDERS if anyone needs some


----------



## Throwback

I guess ya'll don't realize that this is only 1/3 of the process. 


T


----------



## fredw

groundhawg said:


> I was unable to watch the vote. Is there a way/list we can now view to see how each representative voted?
> 
> Thanks.



They are posted on the legislative website but it may take a couple of days.  I'll post a link to it when it's available.


----------



## Throwback

Randy said:


> I bet there will be an influx of hunters to the north.  I may have to raise my lease rates.



or you might have to lower your rates to get anyone to hunt the north...


T


----------



## General Lee

Throwback said:


> I guess ya'll don't realize that this is only 1/3 of the process.
> 
> 
> T


This was the biggest hurdle.The next 2 will be cakewalks now that the black caucus is on board...........


----------



## xdalex

Well it passed good luck southern hunters, Apparently we have enough oak trees in the North that we don't need to bait. lol


----------



## Randy

huntfourfun said:


> As a Southern Zone hunter, can those who have hunted over corn in the past please provide me with some ideas on proper corn placement?  Should it be in the middle of a field?  Near water?  Near bedding?  On the ground?  Trough type feeder?
> 
> Thanks.......



Loation is not important.  It is more important that you have the feeder on a timer so it only goes off during daylight hours.  If it feeds 24/7 they will just wait till dark to come in.  Also of importance is having more corn than your neighbor.  He who has the most feed has the most deer and hogs, oh and coons, and crows oh and predators (they hang around feeders to eat the animals that come in).


----------



## Skyjacker

General Lee said:


> Don't blame GON,they just practiced good journalism and reported the facts



  ok.


----------



## groundhawg

fredw said:


> They are posted on the legislative website but it may take a couple of days.  I'll post a link to it when it's available.



Thank you, Sir.
I will be looking forward to it.


----------



## azdbacks21

I am wondering will the baiting law be taking effect this upcoming deer season?


----------



## Randy

Throwback said:


> or you might have to lower your rates to get anyone to hunt the north...
> 
> 
> T



Naaa.  Hunters will pay good money for fair chase hunting.  There is still enough of those around.


----------



## fredw

azdbacks21 said:


> I am wondering will the baiting law be taking effect this upcoming deer season?


There isn't a new law yet.  The bill will need to be passed by the Senate and then signed by Gov. Deal before it would become law.  What happened today is just one step in the process.


----------



## General Lee

Whether you're for or against the bill,you have to applaud the political savvy demonstrated by Shaw and Roberts to get the Black Caucus to join in their fight.That was classic............


----------



## fredw

General Lee said:


> Whether you're for or against the bill,you have to applaud the political savvy demonstrated by Shaw and Roberts to get the Black Caucus to join in their fight.That was classic............


Do you wonder what Shaw and Roberts traded off for the vote?


----------



## Throwback

anyone know what the amendment consisted of?

T


----------



## Just 1 More

Randy said:


> Naaa.  Hunters will pay good money for fair chase hunting.  There is still enough of those around.



I thought you were going to quit hunting if baiting was allowed in GA ??????


----------



## 270 guy

Looks like corn will be the same scattered or covered. This will be the end of all the deer in GA now LOL. Bait and Bait plots will become equal from the looks of it now. Guess there will be a lot of shooters sitting on bait plots now since they will be the same. Some of y'all amaze me with some of your replies. Just hunt the way your happy with and everyone else will do the same.


----------



## General Lee

fredw said:


> Do you wonder what Shaw and Roberts traded off for the vote?


They only designated that 50 cents for every bag of corn sold go the the Black Caucus..........


----------



## fredw

Throwback said:


> anyone know what the amendment consisted of?
> 
> T


Not officially.


----------



## wcg2

Duh ! It has been going on forever ! Now the next man over can do it without worry of being arrested and within 200 yards and 1 inch !


----------



## Dehunt

*Bill*

Well now it sounds like a done deal for the southern zone.So we can stop fussing at each other and anybody that wants to put out corn during the season can go south now.....Well the truth is the ones that hunt around me in the northern zone for the last 18 years could care less about game laws in general........They buy their license to hunt and thats it....I ask one of the guys in the club next to us about following game laws...He said what laws..You mean do I have my licenses..Said no , I am talking about the rules and regulation booklet that comes out every year.He said that he doesnt read that crap,just looks at season dates and goes to the woods..Believes that he buys his licenses and pays his lease..That he can hunt and do what ever he wants..He said thats what the warden gets paid for is to read that crap and try to enforce it...


----------



## TROY70

General Lee said:


> Whether you're for or against the bill,you have to applaud the political savvy demonstrated by Shaw and Roberts to get the Black Caucus to join in their fight.That was classic............



What might this consist of??


----------



## JBowers

TROY70 said:


> So what was the "Shaw Amendment" they were referring to? I missed it.


 
It should be public tomorrow or much later tonight (if the IT folks are working at the CAP).  I've heard that it will be a prohibition on placing feed/bait within a certain distance of any property boundary unless you have written permission of the adjacent landowner.  Also, I've heard there is another amendment that says any person taking any big game animal other than deer in violation of this code section is upon conviction guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature and subject to a fine of not less than $1500.

Anyhow, you can find out tomorrow.


----------



## Skyjacker

I'm in the southern zone.  Makes me sick.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I beg to differ.  I have slated them over corn in Florida.  Even my Mother-in-law (74) killed three in one sitting with a crossbow she has never shot before.  Like shooting pigs in a barrel.



Depends on how many pigs you got also. The corn is not the only factor. If you dont have a good natural holding place to begin with, your not going to draw deer and pigs to corn like a magnet. I hunt a commercial reserve in Alabama that uses corn, we are asked to come hunt free because the pigs tear up the food plots for deer (their money maker) and my first instinct on the first hunt was (shooting fish in a barrel) but I promise you, I have sit many times and not see a pig.


----------



## Bell_Man

Isn't Shaw a insurance man/farmer?


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> Looks like corn will be the same scattered or covered. This will be the end of all the deer in GA now LOL. Bait and Bait plots will become equal from the looks of it now. Guess there will be a lot of shooters sitting on bait plots now since they will be the same. Some of y'all amaze me with some of your replies. Just hunt the way your happy with and everyone else will do the same.



No just in south Georgia.  There is still hunting in North Georgia.

Does anybody know if Boone and Crocket and /or Pope and young accept baited deer records?


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> No just in south Georgia.  There is still hunting in North Georgia.
> 
> Does anybody know if Boone and Crocket and /or Pope and young accept baited deer records?


Yea I know some that have been entered that were killed over bait,some by spotlight,out of season............


----------



## fredw

Randy said:


> Does anybody know if Boone and Crocket and /or Pope and young accept baited deer records?



Yes they do.


----------



## Randy

Just 1 More said:


> I thought you were going to quit hunting if baiting was allowed in GA ??????



I will when it gets to north Georgia where I hunt.  Who would have thought they would have divided the state!


----------



## georgiabow

azdbacks21 said:


> I am wondering will the baiting law be taking effect this upcoming deer season?



i havent noticed an effective date in the bill, so i would assume it would go into effect immediately once signed by governor.


----------



## Red350SS

The sky is falling the sky is falling......o wait, that just happened when the evil crossbow was made legal....


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> I will when it gets to north Georgia where I hunt.  Who would have thought they would have divided the state!


They did that just for you Randy.They didn't want you to quit hunting............


----------



## Just 1 More

Red350SS said:


> The sky is falling the sky is falling......o wait, that just happened when the evil crossbow was made legal....


----------



## JohnK

secondseason said:


> That is the practice of the people I hunt with down there not mine.  It's not wham bam thank ya ma'am like some would believe.



Yea, I bet it's rough. That's why we got a bunch of porkers pouring corn in front of a box blind 20 feet from a road. Some days they move and some they don't. Dang, it's almost like hunting if you wear your camo.


----------



## georgiabow

Randy said:


> No just in south Georgia.  There is still hunting in North Georgia.



you act like deer are just gonna fall over dead if they come within 10 feet of a corn pile. 

i would be just about willing to bet 10 american dollars that you have something your hiding...........


----------



## Rackbuster

Does this mean the southern boys n gals that enter a truck buck won't have to take the polygraph question of hunting over bait?


----------



## Randy

Red350SS said:


> The sky is falling the sky is falling......o wait, that just happened when the evil crossbow was made legal....



Just half of the sky.


----------



## Randy

georgiabow said:


> you act like deer are just gonna fall over dead if they come within 10 feet of a corn pile.
> 
> i would be just about willing to bet 10 american dollars that you have something your hiding...........



If a person can shoot at all they will.  I have nothing to hide.  I know it works I have shot hogs over bait in Florida before.  There is nothing to it.


----------



## General Lee

I actually have a 500 acre lease on the Glascock/Washington Co line where I can stand on our property boundry in the northern zone and spit into the southern zone. Our deer  are packing their bags now...........


----------



## Throwback

Randy said:


> Just half of the sky.



the other half fell when scopes were put on muzzleloaders

T


----------



## georgiabow

Randy said:


> If a person can shoot at all they will.  I have nothing to hide.  I know it works I have shot hogs over bait in Florida before.  There is nothing to it.



hogs are alot different than deer. i think you fail to realize one positive thing about this bill...... down here in the southern part of the state, we need to thin the herd a bit. 

during summer and fall, our highways are absolutely littered with deer that have been hit by cars, and cars that have hit deer. we are over-run with them down here. also, our farmers are losing their livelyhood to pigs and deer.


----------



## elfiii

The next two things we are going to hear out of the Southern Zone boys:

1. The deer have all gone nocturnal.

2. The Florida boys bid our lease up and we lost it.


----------



## rex upshaw

Skyjacker said:


> I think that Georgia Outdoor News, their website, and all of their employees should get a pat on the back for successfully pushing an agenda.



Yep. I will not renew my subscription.


----------



## Automatic

They may have changed the law...but I still won't EVER congradulate anyone who kills a deer while hunting over corn.  I'll stand by my morals.


----------



## capt stan

IMHO this is a sad day....I feel bad for all the kids out there who will now learn to be shooters of the future...not hunters. I hope it gets stopped somewhere in the process before it becomes law.


----------



## Randy

georgiabow said:


> hogs are alot different than deer. i think you fail to realize one positive thing about this bill...... down here in the southern part of the state, we need to thin the herd a bit.
> 
> during summer and fall, our highways are absolutely littered with deer that have been hit by cars, and cars that have hit deer. we are over-run with them down here. also, our farmers are losing their livelyhood to pigs and deer.



Well I imagine feeding them more they will have less offspring.  Oh wait mother nature does not work like that.


----------



## georgiabow

Automatic said:


> They may have changed the law...but I still won't EVER congradulate anyone who kills a deer while hunting over corn.  I'll stand by my morals.



the law hasnt changed yet. there is more to the legislative process than just passing the house.

as for your morals..... is it really fair for YOUR morals to be someone elses LAWS?


----------



## southgaoriginal

i bet the price of corn will go up this year


----------



## georgiabow

Randy said:


> Well I imagine feeding them more they will have less offspring.  Oh wait mother nature does not work like that.



your gonna wear your shovel out with that big hole your digging yourself into.


----------



## rex upshaw

georgiabow said:


> hogs are alot different than deer. i think you fail to realize one positive thing about this bill...... down here in the southern part of the state, we need to thin the herd a bit.
> 
> during summer and fall, our highways are absolutely littered with deer that have been hit by cars, and cars that have hit deer. we are over-run with them down here. also, our farmers are losing their livelyhood to pigs and deer.



The problem with your statement, is that deer densities can very greatly in different parts of the same county. You will be feeding deer and hogs alike and the hogs are a bigger issue than the deer, when it comes to ag.


----------



## Red350SS

elfiii said:


> The next two things we are going to hear out of the Southern Zone boys:
> 
> 1. The deer have all gone nocturnal.
> 
> 2. The Florida boys bid our lease up and we lost it.



Dont forget corn will be $20 a bag at wallyworld now...


----------



## elfiii

Folks, ya'll are free to voice your opinion on the bill. If this thread turns into personal attacks it is gone and those of you making those personal attacks might be gone too.

Keep it civil or pay the consequences.


----------



## gacowboy

elfiii said:


> The next two things we are going to hear out of the Southern Zone boys:
> 
> 1. The deer have all gone nocturnal.
> 
> 2. The Florida boys bid our lease up and we lost it.



So true! I guess they will end up being corn-fused..

Really and truely it is a Sad day for the sport of hunting.


----------



## bonecollector123

Holy cow it passed?What's next hunting with decoys,doe pee,hunting over corn fields.Honestly fellas some of you are acting like your gonna get fined if you don't bait.I am not from Georgia so I don't want to come off wrong but I really don't see what the big deal is.At least at the end of the next deer season you will have a good idea of how it will effect your state.I don't think it is gonna make as big a deal as you guys think.If you bait the deer gods are not gonna throw giant bucks at you and if you don't you won't see a differance.Sorry if I ruffled feathers but some of you sound like you lost a loved one


----------



## Buckfever

I like the way the guy said the reason Florida hunters come to GA is, because all they have to hunt is the little Key deer to hunt. Aren't they protected? They are so gullible, but wait we voted some of them in.


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> the hogs are a bigger issue than the deer, when it comes to ag.



i grew up on the farm, and i know deer are just as much a problem, just depends on what your planting.


----------



## kmckinnie

People are coming to this thread, Like deer to a feeder! lol


----------



## georgiabow

kmckinnie said:


> People are coming to this thread, Like deer to a feeder! lol



yep.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> If a person can shoot at all they will.  I have nothing to hide.  I know it works I have shot hogs over bait in Florida before.  There is nothing to it.



So you really don't know what hunting deer over bait is really like then.


----------



## Buckfever

capt stan said:


> IMHO this is a sad day....I feel bad for all the kids out there who will now learn to be shooters of the future...not hunters. I hope it gets stopped somewhere in the process before it becomes law.



Lets hope so Stan.


----------



## Skyjacker

georgiabow said:


> down here in the southern part of the state, we need to thin the herd a bit.




  The same people who wanted corn to "thin the herd" are the same people who listed their hunting seasons as poor or less than average in the GON rate your season reviews for all the Southern Counties.  Let it not be said that the Pro-baiters are consistent in their reasoning.


----------



## rex upshaw

bonecollector123 said:


> Holy cow it passed?What's next hunting with decoys,doe pee,hunting over corn fields.Honestly fellas some of you are acting like your gonna get fined if you don't bait.I am not from Georgia so I don't want to come off wrong but I really don't see what the big deal is.At least at the end of the next deer season you will have a good idea of how it will effect your state.I don't think it is gonna make as big a deal as you guys think.If you bait the deer gods are not gonna throw giant bucks at you and if you don't you won't see a differance.Sorry if I ruffled feathers but some of you sound like you lost a loved one



Growing up in Georgia and not hunting over bait, to see it allowed is a kick in the gut. It will not change how I hunt, but it will to the surrounding hunters. And to say it will not make a difference, then why would people waste their money to put it out?


----------



## T/C 300 MAG

The Shaw Bill...Hunters in the northern zone can legally shine from the hours of 9PM to 1AM on odd days and 11PM to 3AM on even days.


----------



## georgiabow

Skyjacker said:


> The same people who wanted corn to "thin the herd" are the same people who listed their hunting seasons as poor or less than average in the GON rate your season reviews for all the Southern Counties.



my reasoning is more along the lines of myself and my wife wrecking 4 vehicles in the last 6 years hitting deer.


----------



## steph30030

Randy said:


> No just in south Georgia.  There is still hunting in North Georgia.
> 
> Does anybody know if Boone and Crocket and /or Pope and young accept baited deer records?



Thats what I want to know too!!! Dont look like they would!


----------



## Buckfever

Randy said:


> Well I imagine feeding them more they will have less offspring.  Oh wait mother nature does not work like that.


----------



## catch22

when does it get voted on in the senate?


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> So you really don't know what hunting deer over bait is really like then.



I did not shoot any deer over bait but they came in when the feeder went off.  But when the hogs came running in they backed off till the hogs ate.  Of course the hogs left nothing for them.  So while I did not shoot them I know how it works.


----------



## Skyjacker

georgiabow said:


> my reasoning is more along the lines of myself and my wife wrecking 4 vehicles in the last 6 years hitting deer.



Question..  are those deer in your freezer?


----------



## steph30030

Skyjacker said:


> The same people who wanted corn to "thin the herd" are the same people who listed their hunting seasons as poor or less than average in the GON rate your season reviews for all the Southern Counties.  Let it not be said that the Pro-baiters are consistent in their reasoning.



Exactly!!!


----------



## Automatic

georgiabow said:


> the law hasnt changed yet. there is more to the legislative process than just passing the house.
> 
> as for your morals..... is it really fair for YOUR morals to be someone elses LAWS?



I'm not saying my morals should dictate the law...California lets you smoke pot, but I still think its wrong. Just because its legal doesn't mean that I have to agree with it.  This IS America.  I don't see the challenge presented or the knowledge needed for "hunting" over corn or any other bait thats all.


----------



## Just 1 More

steph30030 said:


> Thats what I want to know too!!! Dont look like they would!



YES THEY DO !!!!!!!!!!!! 
If it's LEGAL it is considered fair chase.... you know Texas is allowed to bait and they kill deer there ... right????


----------



## Benhillcountyhunter

Just a quick question for some of you that may know.  I read the entire house bill and did not find anything differentiating between baiting on public or private land.  I hunt in Fitzgerald and I not against hunting over corn.  I can honestly say I have never hunting over corn.  We have two feeders that run year around on my private farm but have always hunted out of site over 200 yards from them. The feeders are set up in safe zones.  My question is what is going to be the law on baiting on public land or will the DNR have its own set of regulations?  Just curious.


----------



## steph30030

just 1 more said:


> yes they do !!!!!!!!!!!!
> If it's legal it is considered fair chase.... You know texas is allowed to bait and they kill deer there ... Right????



10-4......... I aint arguing this!!! Its amazing what some people get a kick out of!!!


----------



## Randy

Benhillcountyhunter said:


> Just a quick question for some of you that may know.  I read the entire house bill and did not find anything differentiating between baiting on public or private land.  I hunt in Fitzgerald and I not against hunting over corn.  I can honestly say I have never hunting over corn.  We have two feeders that run year around on my private farm but have always hunted out of site over 200 yards from them. The feeders are set up in safe zones.  My question is what is going to be the law on baiting on public land or will the DNR have its own set of regulations?  Just curious.


Private land only.


----------



## Droptine

Funny how they tried the scare tactic that if one landowner's got feed out it renders the adjoining landowners property legally unhuntable! Some straight grasping for straws with some clever propaganda there. That guy needs to go work for ACORN and Obama. That would mean that a mans bird feeder in his backyard would render the adjacent mans dove field unhuntable because it's baited by association. He forgot that u can feed anywhere or anytime on your own property. Laws only come into effect when you're sitting over it with a weapon. That clown even showed a picture of a dead deer laying in corn!  He probably staged that one this past season since I'm sure he thinks he's above the law and didn't want anybody around him baiting like he was and pulling the deer of his property. Even further he broke out the classic trail camera pic with the deer in mid-air with the photoshoped arrow going into it and blood gushing out the entry wound...he just brought it home with that one!  In his final gasp, he resortes to throwing out his made out figures like 25% of the hunters in south georgia are from a couple Atlanta counties!! What?? They wish! Mark my word, lease prices are going up in the south and the north boys are going to be crying "not fair" everytime a big deer from the south shows up in GON.  The +++25% wish they could find a place to mismanage in south GA but there ain't no openings.

Finally the game wardens can focus their time on worthwhile pursuits like to enforcing the real infractions like trespassing, slob hunting (shooting over the limit, dumping carcasses (especially with minimal meat recovered), shining, destruction and theft of property (gates, cameras, fencing, stands). Maybe now us cheaters in the south can also implement and enforce a real QDM plan that somehow improves bucks chances of getting to 4.5 yrs old….don’t matter about their rack size…just get them to maturity.  We also need a way truly record every deer that's taken in the state in order to truly manage te herd instead of guessing thru questionnaires. Iowa and Illinois are much more rural and folks don't think about moving a deer without tagging it there. Folks also know better than to shine or trespass there.  Bout time our limited resources (wardens) can focus on things the herd can benefit from instead of spending an entire walking a mile back to a particular stand that baited just to find out no body hunted it that morning so he wont be able to issue that $100 ticket!  Then he come back a check again tomorrow and burn some more tax payers money


----------



## georgiabow

Skyjacker said:


> Question..  are those deer in your freezer?



nope.


----------



## JBowers

georgiabow said:


> is it really fair for YOUR morals to be someone elses LAWS?


 
Kind of like the gay marriage issue; abortion issue; or hek any issue lawmakers deal with


----------



## gravedigger83

The democratic process finally worked and we did not have one man or one organization holding everything up.

I can't believe Bob Lane or the GWF could not stop this...........


----------



## gravedigger83

Droptine said:


> Funny how they tried the scare tactic that if one landowner's got feed out it renders the adjoining landowners property legally unhuntable! Some straight grasping for straws with some clever propaganda there. That guy needs to go work for ACORN and Obama. That would mean that a mans bird feeder in his backyard would render the adjacent mans dove field unhuntable because it's baited by association. He forgot that u can feed anywhere or anytime on your own property. Laws only come into effect when you're sitting over it with a weapon. That clown even showed a picture of a dead deer laying in corn!  He probably staged that one this past season since I'm sure he thinks he's above the law and didn't want anybody around him baiting like he was and pulling the deer of his property. Even further he broke out the classic trail camera pic with the deer in mid-air with the photoshoped arrow going into it and blood gushing out the entry wound...he just brought it home with that one!  In his final gasp, he resortes to throwing out his made out figures like 25% of the hunters in south georgia are from a couple Atlanta counties!! What?? They wish! Mark my word, lease prices are going up in the south and the north boys are going to be crying "not fair" everytime a big deer from the south shows up in GON.  The +++25% wish they could find a place to mismanage in south GA but there ain't no openings.
> 
> Finally the game wardens can focus their time on worthwhile pursuits like to enforcing the real infractions like trespassing, slob hunting (shooting over the limit, dumping carcasses (especially with minimal meat recovered), shining, destruction and theft of property (gates, cameras, fencing, stands). Maybe now us cheaters in the south can also implement and enforce a real QDM plan that somehow improves bucks chances of getting to 4.5 yrs old….don’t matter about their rack size…just get them to maturity.  We also need a way truly record every deer that's taken in the state in order to truly manage te herd instead of guessing thru questionnaires. Iowa and Illinois are much more rural and folks don't think about moving a deer without tagging it there. Folks also know better than to shine or trespass there.  Bout time our limited resources (wardens) can focus on things the herd can benefit from instead of spending an entire walking a mile back to a particular stand that baited just to find out no body hunted it that morning so he wont be able to issue that $100 ticket!  Then he come back a check again tomorrow and burn some more tax payers money



Wait Wait no CWD

I did not get a chance to watch it so I am suprised the WRD or GWF did not try and bring up CWD


----------



## morris

JBowers said:


> Kind of like the gay marriage issue; abortion issue; or hek any issue lawmakers deal with



Nope, Baiting deer not gonna send you to Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----.


----------



## JBowers

Benhillcountyhunter said:


> Just a quick question for some of you that may know. I read the entire house bill and did not find anything differentiating between baiting on public or private land. I hunt in Fitzgerald and I not against hunting over corn. I can honestly say I have never hunting over corn. We have two feeders that run year around on my private farm but have always hunted out of site over 200 yards from them. The feeders are set up in safe zones. My question is what is going to be the law on baiting on public land or will the DNR have its own set of regulations? Just curious.


 
BHCH,

The version on the web is about 6 versions old.  The amended version on the floor of the house was the 8th effort at trying to "perfect" the bill.  There is langauge in the bill that passed the House that prohibits any baiting or feeding on state and federal public lands.  It is private land only.

Requires written permission of landowner to bait/feed.

Prohibits placement of feed/bait within 50 yards of an adjacent property boundary unless the person has the written permission of the adjacent landowner.

And, any person taking big game, other than deer, in violation of this code section (aka the bill) upon conviction is guilty of a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature and subject to a fine not less than $1500


----------



## bonecollector123

rex upshaw said:


> Growing up in Georgia and not hunting over bait, to see it allowed is a kick in the gut. It will not change how I hunt, but it will to the surrounding hunters. And to say it will not make a difference, then why would people waste their money to put it out?


Rex,you and I go way back(to the last thread) and we both know that there are alot more people in Georgia hunting over corn than will admit it on here.I see pallets of it at wal-mart every year.And being from floriduh where it is legal and I have done it.You have to understand that it does not gaurantee you a deer.If I asked who on this website right now has a feeder out on their land during hunting season you would be shocked at the answer,now those same guys my be 200 ft and out of sight but how many so called hunters are sitting on a trail that leads to the feeder or food plot for that matter.To me it's to each thier own but I don't think it's gonna change things as much as you think.And if it does remember it when it comes time to vote.


----------



## Automatic

Droptine said:


> Finally the game wardens can focus their time on worthwhile pursuits like to enforcing the real infractions like trespassing, slob hunting (shooting over the limit, dumping carcasses (especially with minimal meat recovered), shining, destruction and theft of property (gates, cameras, fencing, stands). Maybe now us cheaters in the south can also implement and enforce a real QDM plan that somehow improves bucks chances of getting to 4.5 yrs old….don’t matter about their rack size…just get them to maturity.



I think in the bill it says somewhere you have to have a registered feeder (just something I heard).  So, if that's the case then they will still be devoting alot of time and money to baiting because it is the easiest offense to charge someone with.

As for the deer management thing, this ain't Texas, not everyone has 5000 acre ranches.  Kiss the deer quality on your 250 acre tract goodbye unless you have some really good neighbors.


----------



## JBowers

morris said:


> Nope, Baiting deer not gonna send you to Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----.


 
Those are personal moral and ethical choice that are individual choices just as was stated for the baiting issue.  I am not advocating a position, just stating a plain fact of the arguments made on this Board concerning the baiting issue.


----------



## JBowers

Automatic said:


> I think in the bill it says somewhere you have to have a registered feeder (just something I heard). So, if that's the case then they will still be devoting alot of time and money to baiting because it is the easiest offense to charge someone with.


 
No, it does not.


----------



## morris

Nah just sayin Baitin aint like killing babies


----------



## JBowers

Droptine said:


> Funny how they tried the scare tactic that if one landowner's got feed out it renders the adjoining landowners property legally unhuntable! Some straight grasping for straws with some clever propaganda there.


 
The amendments addressed that issue and hold violators of the law to a more stringent penalty ( as many hunters have asked that violators/poachers receive greater penalties).


----------



## JBowers

morris said:


> Nah just sayin Baitin aint like killing babies


 
Agreed!  It's not the act I am making a point of but the logic of the argument.


----------



## morris

or is it?


----------



## JBowers

morris said:


> or is it?


 
Ha!  That's a conversation to be had over drinks!


----------



## morris

yeah


----------



## Automatic

JBowers said:


> No, it does not.



Thanks for clarifying


----------



## JBowers

catch22 said:


> when does it get voted on in the senate?


 
Sometime in the next 9 legislative days (L days are not regular days like what we are used to!).


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> I'd just like to say I am sorry you guys in the south lost your rights to hunt.  But it is what happens when politicians get involved in stuff they know nothing about.
> 
> It should pass the senate just as easily.  They have been paid also.



Folks on here act like everyone in the south is for it. All that shows is that 122 people are for it. And I will find out the fall out of how each rep voted, and I bet that some of the northern reps helped push it down the hill also.

 Whats the difference in killing the mess out of hogs over feed in Florida?, and then being so outspoken against it for deer in Georgia? An animal is an animal. Fair chase is Fair chase. It does not matter if it is a game animal or not.


----------



## MR.WILLIE

I am in the sounthern zone. my neighbors hunted over corn last year and we still ended up killin more deer than they did. However they are from florida so they weren't here the whole season thank God. Maybe changing this bill will not screw anything up too bad.


----------



## gravedigger83

G Duck said:


> You act like everyone in the south is for it. All that shows is that 122 people are for it. And I will find out the fall out of how each rep voted, and I bet that some of the northern reps helped push it down the hill also.
> 
> How can you say you killed the you know what out of hogs over feed in Florida?, and you are so outspoken against it for deer in Georgia? An animal is an animal. Fair chase is Fair chase. It does not matter if it is a game animal or not.
> Whose the politician here?



Who are the politicians here  

I suggest that they are the same fellows that tried so hard for years to keep this type of Bill coming up for a vote.

Any names come to mind


----------



## 270 guy

G Duck said:


> Folks on here act like everyone in the south is for it. All that shows is that 122 people are for it. And I will find out the fall out of how each rep voted, and I bet that some of the northern reps helped push it down the hill also.
> 
> Whats the difference in killing the mess out of hogs over feed in Florida?, and then being so outspoken against it for deer in Georgia? An animal is an animal. Fair chase is Fair chase. It does not matter if it is a game animal or not.



BINGO we have a winner instead of a whinner.


----------



## kmckinnie

We killed bigger deer and more of them than our neighbors who hunted over corn! They killed a lot of hogs! There from that area! There good ol ga boys! I don't think much will change much! They did shoot some little one we let go! I don't think this bill will mess things up to bad!!


----------



## G Duck

gravedigger83 said:


> Who are the politicians here
> 
> I suggest that they are the same fellows that tried so hard for years to keep this type of Bill coming up for a vote.
> 
> Any names come to mind



Bunch of folks that want us to do as they say, not as they do.......


----------



## 1stTimeGaHunter

Im sorry, but personally, i grew up hunting over bait and to me it is a little of a relief that the process of this becoming legal is happening because it is finally allowing me, and out of state hunter who is having to adjust to a new area and anew place and a new style of hunting, to get back in my comfort zone of hunting. this is somehting i am much more familiar with. And all of you can say all you want about it not being true sport or fair chase, but regardless of how much you choose to cry and complain here i know if those anti-hunters decide to try something stupid, when push comes to shove all of you are gonna be confident, because you know we are all hunters regardless of the way we choose to hunt. Because its not just about how you take your game or chase your game, its how you respect what your taking and dont abuse this God given privilege you have. So like i said hunting is about your enjoyment of the outdoors and the pleasure you take in getting away from the everyday monotony of work and every other possible stress. because i know that no matter what you try and tell me, i will be just as happy hunting the way i do as you will hunting the way you do.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

fredw said:


> Do you wonder what Shaw and Roberts traded off for the vote?



Their souls?

Just kidding.


Sorta.


The serious answer is you can bet it was something a lot more valuable than the right to kill deer over a pile of bait.  They just took the "hunt" out of deer hunting in the Southern Zone.  My condolences to the hunters in South Georgia who still believe in fair chase and doing things the right way.



G Duck said:


> Fair chase is Fair chase. It does not matter if it is a game animal or not.



I couldn't possibly disagree more and the State of Georgia does not agree either or they wouldn't let you shoot coyotes at night with a light and with electronic calls.

Thank God this bill was only for South Georgia, but I know it won't be long until such shameful legislation comes to the Northern Zone too.


----------



## Chris 195 7/8 B&C

Quoted by Theodore Roosevelt IV;  As another hunter once said: “To violate the wildness that is part of the animal’s makeup and our own is a travesty.”


----------



## FlipKing

Ive hunted over feeders in North Carolina.(scared the crap out of me the first time because no one told me it was legal and when the sun came up, I was over a feeder.) It really didnt give me a huge advantage honestly. Deer learn very quickly and once they learn that the feeders are danger zones, the advantage is minimal. There are still huge and healthy deer killed out where I hunt in NC every year so its not like baiting is the end of hunting. Not to mention the numbers of hunters are growing smaller every year and we kinda killed off all natural predators so......


----------



## bonecollector123

I bet ol Theodore wasn't sitting 30 feet off the ground in a 300.00 treestand with a rifle that shoots 400 yards or a bow that shoots 300 fps.Look the way I see it it's a tool that you can either use or not.To say that if you pour corn on the ground your not a hunter is crazy unless you hunt with an old flintlock or a stick and string or even a spear.I am not for it or against it.I think it's your God givin right as an american to hunt or fish how ever you choose as long as it's legal and it looks like it is gonna be real soon.I hope everyone has a safe and sucsessfull hunting season however you choose to hunt.And don't forget our soldiers who are out there fighting for our rights as Americans when you pray tonight. God bless fellas


----------



## huntfourfun

If it becomes legal does not mean ALL SZ hunters will hunt over corn.........it does not mean they have to hunt over corn.  This simply gives them more options.


----------



## Throwback

Chris 195 7/8 B&C said:


> Quoted by Theodore Roosevelt IV;  As another hunter once said: “To violate the wildness that is part of the animal’s makeup and our own is a travesty.”



TR was a progressive. 


T


----------



## shdw633

huntfourfun said:


> If it becomes legal does not mean ALL SZ hunters will hunt over corn.........it does not mean they have to hunt over corn.  This simply gives them more options.



It also means we won't get a ticket if someone else throws it out and we happen to be sitting 100 yards over the next hill totally unaware that the pile is there when Mr. Greenjeans walks up.


----------



## nickel back

elfiii said:


> The next two things we are going to hear out of the Southern Zone boys:
> 
> 1. The deer have all gone nocturnal.
> 
> 2. The Florida boys bid our lease up and we lost it.



yep.....then some


----------



## gsubo

GON=kiss of death to good public land hunting and fishing and the most pro baiting mess Ive ever read.

They've already sent me my three renewal notices..you would have figured they would have gotten the hint by now.


----------



## Double-droptine

Randy said:


> No just in south Georgia.  There is still hunting in North Georgia.
> 
> Does anybody know if Boone and Crocket and /or Pope and young accept baited deer records?





Just 1 More said:


> YES THEY DO !!!!!!!!!!!!
> If it's LEGAL it is considered fair chase.... you know Texas is allowed to bait and they kill deer there ... right????



That's not 100% accurate,they do accept deer killed over bait but everything that is legal is not considered fair chase.It's legal to hunt in a high fence but deer shot in a high fence are not eligible for entry.


----------



## Randy

G Duck said:


> Folks on here act like everyone in the south is for it. All that shows is that 122 people are for it. And I will find out the fall out of how each rep voted, and I bet that some of the northern reps helped push it down the hill also.
> 
> Whats the difference in killing the mess out of hogs over feed in Florida?, and then being so outspoken against it for deer in Georgia? An animal is an animal. Fair chase is Fair chase. It does not matter if it is a game animal or not.


Hogs are a pest on the ranch I was shooting the on.  I was just killing.  There was no hunting to it.  And you're right there is no difference in killing hogs over bait or killing deer over bait.  Either one is just killing.


----------



## Just 1 More

Double-droptine said:


> That's not 100% accurate,they do accept deer killed over bait but everything that is legal is not considered fair chase.It's legal to hunt in a high fence but deer shot in a high fence are not eligible for entry.



High fence is not fair chase


----------



## Just 1 More

Automatic said:


> I think in the bill it says somewhere you have to have a registered feeder (just something I heard).  So, if that's the case then they will still be devoting alot of time and money to baiting because it is the easiest offense to charge someone with.
> 
> As for the deer management thing, this ain't Texas, not everyone has 5000 acre ranches.  Kiss the deer quality on your 250 acre tract goodbye unless you have some really good neighbors.



And people wonder how rumors and false information gets started


----------



## Double-droptine

Just 1 More said:


> High fence is not fair chase



You said if it was legal it was fair chase not me.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Double-droptine said:


> You said if it was legal it was fair chase not me.



You've got to keep up!

He sells feeders! Not fences!


----------



## Just 1 More

Double-droptine said:


> You said if it was legal it was fair chase not me.



I thought we were talking about baiting .... I was sticking to the subject matter.. not painting with a broad brush


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> Hogs are a pest on the ranch I was shooting the on.  I was just killing.  There was no hunting to it.  And you're right there is no difference in killing hogs over bait or killing deer over bait.  Either one is just killing.



Try explaining the difference to a child.


----------



## Double-droptine

Just 1 More said:


> And people wonder how rumors and false information gets started





Just 1 More said:


> I thought we were talking about baiting .... I was sticking to the subject matter.. not painting with a broad brush



I just didn't want any false information to get rumors started


----------



## xdalex

Did SB188 fail or pass.?


----------



## G Duck

Oh,  and thank you northern zone for the democratic caucus.


----------



## 24on48hunting

G Duck said:


> Oh,  and thank you northern zone for the democratic caucus.





All of us up here in the Northern zone aren't democrats. Only right in Atlanta. South Georgia has more democrats than REAL North Georgia has. Just compare Georgia party affiliation maps with where majority of slavery was most prominent in Georgia. They're pretty similar


----------



## Grey Man

24on48 has a point. I live in a northern Atlanta suburb and most folks around here are as conservative as you will find anywhere. We're Newts district, after all.

I am irritated that its southern zone only. Do it or don't, that's what I say.


----------



## georgiabow

Just 1 More said:


> High fence is not fair chase



neither is killing them with a bow or gun.


----------



## Meriwether Mike

I would certainly hope that GON is going to divide their Truck Buck Contest into a "hunters" and "baiters" category? Giving away two trucks is going to get expensive!  GON will also have to add a question category to the "baiters" entry form for the type of bait you had out.


----------



## mtr3333

Well, more progress I suppose.


----------



## trucknhunter

I can't wait until deer season I'm going to be able to hunt over corn legally thank God for democracy our voices have finally been heard congrats to all I'm sure this will be a season to remember.


----------



## G Duck

Heres a question, Where would you rather be during and afternoon hunt during peak rut?
A. In the middle of a 2000 acre tract of pines and palmettos with a feeder in South Ga?
or
B. Or in a Tripod overlooking a 50 acre cut corn field in Middle Ga?


----------



## widowmaker1

G Duck said:


> Heres a question, Where would you rather be during and afternoon hunt during peak rut?
> A. In the middle of a 2000 acre tract of pines and palmettos with a feeder in South Ga?
> or
> B. Or in a Tripod overlooking a 50 acre cut corn field in Middle Ga?



neither-I'd rather be in a funnel between a white oak bottom and a bedding area that I scouted out


----------



## G Duck

24on48hunting said:


> All of us up here in the Northern zone aren't democrats. Only right in Atlanta. South Georgia has more democrats than REAL North Georgia has. Just compare Georgia party affiliation maps with where majority of slavery was most prominent in Georgia. They're pretty similar



It will be interesting to see how the votes were cast north vs south. It should have been voted on as a whole state. Pass or fail.


----------



## G Duck

widowmaker1 said:


> neither-I'd rather be in a funnel between a white oak bottom and a bedding area that I scouted out



A or B


----------



## macdog82881

Well if it gets fully passed on the southern zone and not in the northern I am baiting anyways that is crap it should be statewide just like the season dates!


----------



## widowmaker1

G Duck said:


> A or B



by the peak of the rut-there will be no corn left on the ground in the corn field-so i still go with C


----------



## Randy

Meriwether Mike said:


> I would certainly hope that GON is going to divide their Truck Buck Contest into a "hunters" and "baiters" category? Giving away two trucks is going to get expensive!  GON will also have to add a question category to the "baiters" entry form for the type of bait you had out.


Why?  They care nothing about fairness in hunting.  My hope is that hunters in North Georgia just won't be a part of it.


----------



## Allen Waters

What is their reasoning on dividing the north and south on this. Hasn't the north and south been divided enough? I thought they talked about making the north and south zone seasons the same?
Guess there has to be something to divide us

I run a club in south Ga. so I guess i better get to editing my club rules.....


----------



## Randy

Grey Man said:


> 24on48 has a point. I live in a northern Atlanta suburb and most folks around here are as conservative as you will find anywhere. We're Newts district, after all.
> 
> I am irritated that its southern zone only. Do it or don't, that's what I say.


They had to do it this way.  There was not enough support to get it state waide.  The had to buy the black caucus as it was.


----------



## gacowboy

Here is a link to the vote:
http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/Vote.aspx?VoteID=8072 

8 did not vote??


----------



## Michael Lee

Yea (Y): 122
Nay (N): 48
Not Voting (-): 8
Excused (E): 2


----------



## widowmaker1

Looks like the southern zone will be baiting-right across the dirt road at my house is the southern zone -so i guess i will have no deer next season


----------



## Michael Lee

Key notes:

Southern Zone Only

Must have written permission from landowner

Must be 50 yards from property line (unless written permission to hunt over bait from adjoining land owner is held)

Can only shoot deer (no other game animal) and hogs over bait area


----------



## widowmaker1

Good bye hunting


----------



## UYD4L

georgiabow said:


> i havent noticed an effective date in the bill, so i would assume it would go into effect immediately once signed by governor.



That's what I was thinking but then I took a look at this:
http://georgiainfo.galileo.usg.edu/legchart/legchart.htm

If you take a look at the very last step, it says the Bill becomes law on the 1st of July after it is signed by the Governor, if there is no effective date in the Bill.  So I'm guessing it will have to go through before July to be law this coming season.



elfiii said:


> The next two things we are going to hear out of the Southern Zone boys:
> 
> 1. The deer have all gone nocturnal.
> 
> 2. The Florida boys bid our lease up and we lost it.



1.  Deer are already nocturnal and there is already a bunch of corn out.  This probably wont help though.

2.  Maybe if all the Northern bait bashers stay in Atl. there will be plenty of spots in their southern leases for the Floriduh boys.



JBowers said:


> Kind of like the gay marriage issue; abortion issue; or hek any issue lawmakers deal with



I think those are poor comparisons there are other issues besides ethics/morality involved in those examples. Gay marriage isn't a crime its just not recognized by the state.  And saying abortion is strictly a moral issue would be like saying murder is strictly a moral issue.  If you want to use similar examples, criminalizing baiting would be more like criminalizing homosexuality or pre-marital sex.  


But anyways, WOW, I honestly didn't see that coming.  I feel bad for all you guys that passionately oppose baiting.  Hopefully, it won't make much difference.  Take some solace in the fact that all that may change is how close you can sit when you pull the trigger.  Most of the major concerns with feeding are there under the current law.

Congrats to all you who were hoping for this (I think I heard Denny hootin' last night).


----------



## wmahunter

OK, here's the way you folks that don't like this new law can undo it:
This is the wording of the GA Code that authorizes the DNR to set the geographic zones and HB277 clearly states that this bill will follow the same geographical zones that the "board" establishes for the north and south deer hunting zones.

_"(c) In accordance with subsection (b) of this Code section and as may be appropriate, based on sound wildlife management principles, the board is authorized to promulgate rules and regulations establishing open seasons on a state-wide, regional, or local basis and establishing daily and season bag limits."_

Now all you have to do is get the DNR to set the north/south line somewhere down near Valdosta and you win!!


----------



## 440Mopar

Cry cry wimper wimper no more deer hunting......
 Just means i'll get my three i need in bow season and leave the rest for yall


----------



## joepuppy

Some people make no sense. They cry over this baiting issue like all the food plots and buck Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ---- they pour out isn't attracting deer like food. A fish is an animal. We've baited them for hundreds of years. No one looks at the reality here. You don't have to bait.I love it cause I am a MEAT HUNTER, like God intended. After I kill my (2) deer, I am back at the house watching football. If they would come to me, I wouldn't even buy a stand. You want fair chase, get a spear/indian style bow and have at it. But don't call me unethical b/c I use a different attractant than you. What's stupid is the doe limit in GA. No one needs to shoot that many deer. We've fed deer for years,no disease, no shortage, and they are still wild animals everywhere around the house. You see the "deer corn"  at Wal Mart, and it sells . So i am not the only one who sees it this way.


----------



## nickel back

UYD4L said:


> 1.  Deer are already nocturnal and there is already a bunch of corn out.  This probably wont help though.
> 
> 2.  Maybe if all the Northern bait bashers stay in Atl. there will be plenty of spots in their southern leases for the Floriduh boys.



The land owners in south Ga. right now see $$$$ in the near future.


----------



## Randy

widowmaker1 said:


> Good bye hunting



Sorry for your loss but many of us really tried.


----------



## UYD4L

nickel back said:


> The land owners in south Ga. right now see $$$$ in the near future.



I hope so!


----------



## Randy

joepuppy said:


> Some people make no sense. They cry over this baiting issue like all the food plots and buck Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ----Edited to Remove Profanity ---- they pour out isn't attracting deer like food. A fish is an animal. We've baited them for hundreds of years. No one looks at the reality here. You don't have to bait.I love it cause I am a MEAT HUNTER, like God intended. After I kill my (2) deer, I am back at the house watching football. If they would come to me, I wouldn't even buy a stand. You want fair chase, get a spear/indian style bow and have at it. But don't call me unethical b/c I use a different attractant than you. What's stupid is the doe limit in GA. No one needs to shoot that many deer. We've fed deer for years,no disease, no shortage, and they are still wild animals everywhere around the house. You see the "deer corn"  at Wal Mart, and it sells . So i am not the only one who sees it this way.



No you are not the only one who cares nothing about hunting, just killing meat.  I don't hold that against you.  Just hope I don't see you bragging about some big deer you killed.  It is just meat who cares.


----------



## Hairtrigger

widowmaker1 said:


> Good bye hunting



Its the end of the world!!!!!oh nooooo!!!


----------



## birdy1

I'M gettin me a corn wagon! I like my meat corn fat. Gives me more time to see which  DOE im gonna eat!!!!!


----------



## HuntinDawg89

gacowboy said:


> Here is a link to the vote:
> http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/Vote.aspx?VoteID=8072
> 
> 8 did not vote??



Thanks for the link.  I'm annoyed to find that my rep voted for this lousy legislation.  Oh, well, what can you expect from an Auburn grad?  Not much I guess.


----------



## nickel back

UYD4L said:


> I hope so!



no reason to hope,I see nothing stopping this bill.


----------



## Just 1 More

georgiabow said:


> neither is killing them with a bow or gun.



WHAT???? Thtas the dumbest comment yet


----------



## UYD4L

Skyjacker said:


> I think that Georgia Outdoor News, their website, and all of their employees should get a pat on the back for successfully pushing an agenda.



I don't think they did or do a whole lot.  They don't even have a story on their site this am.  



nickel back said:


> no reason to hope,I see nothing stopping this bill.



Well, even if it does pass I'm not so sure that's going to translate to money for many SGA landowners.  Most people are probably going to pretty much do what they did last year or something similar.  I doubt there is a flood of money into SGA because of this.  But it would be nice if there was.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

What I haven't seen discussed about this legislation is that it makes it virtually impossible to enforce the law against hunting over bait in the Northern Zone.  If the bill was passed as described by GON then it legalized hunting hogs over bait for the entire year in the entire state.  On the surface I have no problem with that, but think about this:  In the past Mr. Green Jeans could locate baited areas with stands over them and come back and ticket you if you were in the stand with the bait present.  Now if he comes and finds you hunting over bait you just say you are hog hunting...even if you've never seen a hog on that property.  Now he has to catch you actually shooting a deer or with a fresh killed deer in the baited area to enforce the law, which will be virtually impossible given their limited resources.  So what this means is in the Northern Zone your neighbor can break the law and shoot deer over bait all he wants and it will be virtually impossible that he will ever get fined for it.  Mean while you are on your side of the property line obeying the law while your neighbor has an unfair and unethical advantage and is killing deer he wouldn't otherwise have seen.

And don't give me the nonsense about baiting not helping that much and not making it much easier - IF IT DOESN'T HELP THAT MUCH WHY WERE SO MANY PEOPLE DYING TO GET THE RIGHT TO KILL OVER BAIT?????????


----------



## nickel back

UYD4L said:


> Well, even if it does pass I'm not so sure that's going to translate to money for many SGA landowners.  Most people are probably going to pretty much do what they did last year or something similar.  I doubt there is a flood of money into SGA because of this.  But it would be nice if there was.



Im sure the land owners will be able to go up on the land lease per acre,no problem.


----------



## LonePine

nickel back said:


> no reason to hope,I see nothing stopping this bill.



Neither do I but remember this bill is only 1/3 of the way through the process.  Contact your local State Senator and then the Governor if it should pass the Senate.  Maybe the Senate will use better judgment and not fall for some of the same backroom politics that got it through the house.


----------



## UYD4L

I agree that hog baiting issue in the north is the biggest problem with this Bill.  They should have made the whole thing southern only.  No hunting hogs over bait in the north.  I imagine thats one reason they put in the increased fines to try and deter northerns from trying that.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

HuntinDawg89 said:


> What I haven't seen discussed about this legislation is that it makes it virtually impossible to enforce the law against hunting over bait in the Northern Zone.  If the bill was passed as described by GON then it legalized hunting hogs over bait for the entire year in the entire state.  On the surface I have no problem with that, but think about this:  In the past Mr. Green Jeans could locate baited areas with stands over them and come back and ticket you if you were in the stand with the bait present.  Now if he comes and finds you hunting over bait you just say you are hog hunting...even if you've never seen a hog on that property.




In the upstate of SC, they make and proscute cases like this all the time. You better have hog rooting under and around  the feeder.....trail cam pictures would be even better.

Most folks contact their local DNR Leo and explain their intentions before attempting such a thing.


----------



## JBowers

xdalex said:


> Did SB188 fail or pass.?


 
It was soundly defeated.


----------



## nickel back

Lance45lb said:


> Neither do I but remember this bill is only 1/3 of the way through the process.  Contact your local State Senator and then the Governor if it should pass the Senate.  Maybe the Senate will use better judgment and not fall for some of the same backroom politics that got it through the house.



I can not tell you the emails I have sent out on this.I really think they are pushing this through no matter what.


----------



## UYD4L

nickel back said:


> Im sure the land owners will be able to go up on the land lease per acre,no problem.



Maybe so but only if demand for leases in the southern zone increases.  Leasors aren't going to be able to say, "you can bait now, I want more money."  I doubt there will be much more interest from FL; they're here now.  I guess some people from NGA and AL who aren't already here might start coming.  Time will tell.  But I'm not so sure there is going to be a gold rush.  On the other hand NGA leases may go down if landowners up there are looking to keep people from heading south.  So like all changes, could be good for some bad for others.


----------



## gravedigger83

Lance45lb said:


> Neither do I but remember this bill is only 1/3 of the way through the process.  Contact your local State Senator and then the Governor if it should pass the Senate.  Maybe the Senate will use better judgment and not fall for some of the same backroom politics that got it through the house.



You have got to be kidding me RIGHT....

THe only reason that this was not passed years ago is because one selfish politician would not let it get out of his committee to be voted on.

Bob Lane from Statesboro held this up every year by request from the GWF and because he did not want the little land owners around him to be able to pull the deer off of his property where his family hunted.

GWF beware of this tree hugging organization that prays on uneducated hunters to try and push it's views around.


----------



## UYD4L

JBowers said:


> It was soundly defeated.



What's the current law on high fence in GA?  Can you shoot deer in a high fence now?  What changes was SB 188 making?


----------



## Randy

gravedigger83 said:


> You have got to be kidding me RIGHT....
> 
> THe only reason that this was not passed years ago is because one selfish politician would not let it get out of his committee to be voted on.
> 
> Bob Lane from Statesboro held this up every year by request from the GWF and because he did not want the little land owners around him to be able to pull the deer off of his property where his family hunted.
> 
> GWF beware of this tree hugging organization that prays on uneducated hunters to try and push it's views around.


No you are kidding yourself.  This had to be cut back to half the state only as it does not have enough support to pass the whole state.


----------



## Twenty five ought six

It's for the children.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Randy said:


> No you are kidding yourself.  This had to be cut back to half the state only as it does not have enough support to pass the whole state.



Randy, don't pay attention to Tony. He's trying to make it personal. Don't let him get to you.


----------



## Randy

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Randy, don't pay attention to Tony. He's trying to make it personal. Don't let him get to you.


Oh I know.  I was trying to let others that might not know Tony understand what was going on.


----------



## gravedigger83

Randy said:


> No you are kidding yourself.  This had to be cut back to half the state only as it does not have enough support to pass the whole state.





Dang  Randy I just spit tea all over my computer you sure are one funny guy.


Yea (Y): 122
Nay (N): 48
Not Voting (-): 8
Excused (E): 2 


Yep looks like it was right down the Northern /  Southern line 

Everyone that has watched this for years knew that as soon as Bob left it would get out for a vote and that it would pass,

Finally the vocal MINORITY did not prevail and the majority of georgia hunters voices have been heard.


----------



## gravedigger83

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Randy, don't pay attention to Tony. He's trying to make it personal. Don't let him get to you.



Nothing personal just the facts, I know they are hard for you to deal with but they are the facts just the same.


----------



## rex upshaw

Proponents of both say they would make South Georgia plantations more profitable for paying hunters because they would be guaranteed to bag a deer

http://jacksonville.com/news/georgi...gia-house-passes-bill-allow-hunters-bait-deer


----------



## secondseason

rex upshaw said:


> Proponents of both say they would make South Georgia plantations more profitable for paying hunters because they would be guaranteed to bag a deer
> 
> http://jacksonville.com/news/georgi...gia-house-passes-bill-allow-hunters-bait-deer



I wouldn't guarantee someone a deer if they were in the same 8x10 room with it.


----------



## Curly

there are a bunch of pity panty pushers on here.  move on.


----------



## Randy

secondseason said:


> I wouldn't guarantee someone a deer if they were in the same 8x10 room with it.


Why not.  Texas hunting ranches stake their bussiness on it daily.  It works.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

gravedigger83 said:


> Dang  Randy I just spit tea all over my computer you sure are one funny guy.
> 
> 
> Yea (Y): 122
> Nay (N): 48
> Not Voting (-): 8
> Excused (E): 2
> 
> 
> Yep looks like it was right down the Northern /  Southern line
> 
> Everyone that has watched this for years knew that as soon as Bob left it would get out for a vote and that it would pass,
> 
> Finally the vocal MINORITY did not prevail and the majority of georgia hunters voices have been heard.



Clearly what happened is that the bill received votes from Northern Zone reps who wouldn't have voted for it if it legalized baiting in the Northern Zone because they can now look at their constituents and try to tell us that it didn't affect us so we shouldn't be mad at them for voting for it.  Not to mention the metro area votes they received by making whatever horrific deal with the black caucus.  If legalized killing over bait had the widespread support you claim then the bill would have included the Northern Zone too (thank God it didn't, but I'm sure they'll make a run at that in the next few years too).


----------



## rex upshaw

gravedigger83 said:


> Finally the vocal MINORITY did not prevail and the majority of georgia hunters voices have been heard.



  that's funny.  not sure how you think you can call yourself a hunter, if you are shooting a deer at a bait pile.  but good luck with that and be sure to come on here braggin' of your accomplishments next season.

i will not be here to witness it, but i'm sure you will get a few "atta boy's" from like minded "hunters".


----------



## secondseason

Randy said:


> Why not.  Texas hunting ranches stake their bussiness on it daily.  It works.



I don't know a "hunters" ability.  And most ranches guarantee a shot opportunity, there's a big difference.


----------



## LonePine

gravedigger83 said:


> Finally the vocal MINORITY did not prevail and the majority of georgia hunters voices have been heard.




That is a bold statement.  I didn't realize the vote was left up to Georgia hunters.  I was under the impression that it was voted on by state representatives.

This bill was voted on by state representatives.  The majority of these politicians know nothing about or have little interest in the outdoors/hunting.  I hate the fact that a represenative from Dekalb County that has never set foot in the woods a day is his life, votes a certain way because a caucus that he is a part of tells him to vote a certain way because they traded their votes for votes on another bill.  

But thats politics I guess.  Still is a shame that this bill passed the house.  Hopefully it will get voted down or die in the senate.


----------



## gravedigger83

rex upshaw said:


> that's funny.  not sure how you think you can call yourself a hunter, if you are shooting a deer at a bait pile.  but good luck with that and be sure to come on here braggin' of your accomplishments next season.
> 
> i will not be here to witness it, but i'm sure you will get a few "atta boy's" from like minded "hunters".



Oh yea of little knowledge.

I have never posted pictures on here of any animal I have killed.

No need to. I don't need your approval for the way I hunt  nor do I need your congarulations on the animals I have killed.

Now if you would like to see some animals from Georgia , Florida,South Carolina,North Carolina, Canada or any other place I have hunted let me know and I'll email you some.


----------



## Randy

gravedigger83 said:


> Dang  Randy I just spit tea all over my computer you sure are one funny guy.
> 
> 
> Yea (Y): 122
> Nay (N): 48
> Not Voting (-): 8
> Excused (E): 2
> 
> 
> Yep looks like it was right down the Northern /  Southern line
> 
> Everyone that has watched this for years knew that as soon as Bob left it would get out for a vote and that it would pass,
> 
> Finally the vocal MINORITY did not prevail and the majority of georgia hunters voices have been heard.



Bob Lane doesn't hunt deer.

Bob Lane did not hold the bill at the request of GWF. He held the bill because he is committed to the principle that biological wildlife management decisions should be made by professional wildlife biologists, not politicians.

He exercised his authority as Chairman no different than any other Chairman, including the current Chairman of the Game, Fish & Parks who stacked the subcommittee hearing on HB 277 with proponents of baiting and then scheduled a full Committee meeting when most committee members opposed to HB 277 could not make the meeting.

Just the facts.


----------



## gravedigger83

Lance45lb said:


> That is a bold statement.  I didn't realize the vote was left up to Georgia hunters.  I was under the impression that it was voted on by state representatives.
> 
> This bill was voted on by state representatives.  The majority of these politicians know nothing about or have little interest in the outdoors/hunting.  I hate the fact that a represenative from Dekalb County that has never set foot in the woods a day is his life, votes a certain way because a caucus that he is a part of tells him to vote a certain way because they traded their votes for votes on another bill.
> 
> But thats politics I guess.  Still is a shame that this bill passed the house.  Hopefully it will get voted down or die in the senate.



Not a bold statement just the facts.

The democratic process finally had a chance to work after Bob left.

If it had been voted down so be it.
But at least it was able to move past committee for a vote, that is the real Democratic process not when one selfish man can hold up anything he wants because he is the chair of a committee.


Now if you don't understand this I am sure you can ask Jeff he likes telling everyone about how things work or should work.


----------



## nickel back

$$$$$$$


----------



## rex upshaw

nickel back said:


> $$$$$$$



yep-


Proponents of both say they would make South Georgia plantations more profitable for paying hunters because they would be guaranteed to bag a deer

too bad they didn't listen to david knight-


“We cannot manage our wildlife on a profit motive,” he warned.


----------



## gravedigger83

Randy said:


> Bob Lane doesn't hunt deer.
> 
> Bob Lane did not hold the bill at the request of GWF. He held the bill because he is committed to the principle that biological wildlife management decisions should be made by professional wildlife biologists, not politicians.
> 
> He exercised his authority as Chairman no different than any other Chairman, including the current Chairman of the Game, Fish & Parks who stacked the subcommittee hearing on HB 277 with proponents of baiting and then scheduled a full Committee meeting when most committee members opposed to HB 277 could not make the meeting.
> 
> Just the facts.



Dang I did not know Bob doesn't hunt

I am sure you know him personally right.

I am sure that him not wanting small land owners around his property to bait and draw the deer that he and his grandkids where hunting had nothing to do with this.......

Oh wait that is what he told Tony when they were talking in the committee room.So i guess I'll go with that..

Just the Facts boys lets stick with them


----------



## UYD4L

I don't know anything about the inner workings of the GA legislation.  And what we've heard is a deal was struck.  However, logic tells me there is some truth to what gravedigger says.

The Bill has been introduced many times before with the same money, rationale, etc. behind it.  It was never given a chance.  This time it made it to the floor and it passed.  The main difference this time would appear to be the Chairman of the Rules committee.


----------



## Red350SS

I can tell you one thing about David Knight, as I have known him for over 30 years....if he says something about hunting and/or wildlife, he has researched it and knows what he is talking about. I personally do not have a care if the bill passes or not, but I feel that if I had to choose sides in this case I would more than likely side with David on it. He walks the walk and talks the talk....he is for real.


----------



## Just 1 More

Randy said:


> *Bob Lane doesn't hunt deer*.
> 
> Bob Lane did not hold the bill at the request of GWF. He held the bill because he is committed to the principle that biological wildlife management decisions should be made by professional wildlife biologists, not politicians.
> 
> He exercised his authority as Chairman no different than any other Chairman, including the current Chairman of the Game, Fish & Parks who stacked the subcommittee hearing on HB 277 with proponents of baiting and then scheduled a full Committee meeting when most committee members opposed to HB 277 could not make the meeting.
> 
> Just the facts.





gravedigger83 said:


> *Dang I did not know Bob doesn't hunt
> 
> I am sure you know him personally right.*I am sure that him not wanting small land owners around his property to bait and draw the deer that he and his grandkids where hunting had nothing to do with this.......
> 
> Oh wait that is what he told Tony when they were talking in the committee room.So i guess I'll go with that..
> 
> Just the Facts boys lets stick with them



Randy???? Care to explain????


----------



## Randy

UYD4L said:


> I don't know anything about the inner workings of the GA legislation.  And what we've heard is a deal was struck.  However, logic tells me there is some truth to what gravedigger says.
> 
> The Bill has been introduced many times before with the same money, rationale, etc. behind it.  It was never given a chance.  This time it made it to the floor and it passed.  The main difference this time would appear to be the Chairman of the Rules committee.



There are just times when stuff like this shoudl not be left to legislators.  Most of them know NOTHING about this sport or care about our resources.


----------



## rex upshaw

i guess you guys that are arguing for putting it out for women and children are also the same group that don't want kids football/soccer/baseball games to keep score?  this is part of the reason our society is becoming a bunch of pansies.


----------



## jbroadnax

*Feeding*

Everyone just needs to continue hunt by any method they choose regardless of whether or not the bill passes the Senate.  I believe most of the hunters complaining about the bill have never hunted legally over bait.  The truth is baiting does not guarantee success.  I have hunted Kansas the last 4 years and hunted over bait and natural food on many of my “sits”.  I have witnessed on many counts deer walking right by a mound of corn in subzero temps and never even give it a glance.  Deer will almost always prefer natural food.  Will I feed if the bill passes?  Heck yeah.  I will also continue to plant numerous acres of summer and fall food plots.  I will supplement the plots with corn or peanuts.  This will guarantee in the event we have a drought in October, which has become quite common, the deer will still have something to eat.  Feeding will also help with encouraging my son to hunt because he will bore less easily if he is able to see game more frequently.    I will certainly teach him how hunt keeping the wind in your favor, how to hunt deer sign, and teach him good marksmanship, etc.    If the baiting bill passes, it will also become easier to keep our hog population in check which is a real problem to say the least.


----------



## Randy

Just 1 More said:


> Randy???? Care to explain????



Bob Lane does not hunt deer.


----------



## BONE HEAD

I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.

 They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.


----------



## georgiabuck6

my 2 cents...... Its their first move to banning deer dogging, you don't need dogs if you can bring them out with corn, and only in the southern zone???? answers a few questions in my mind!


----------



## huntfourfun

per fredw's request.........

IF and that is a big IF baiting does become legal, how many of you hunters in the SZ will use corn to bait?

Personally, food plots are easier to plant and no maintenance! I bet I have over 40 stands on 3000 ac. that range from 6-25 miles, it would be impossible for me to put corn out in front of all these stands and more expensive than a food plot.

What percent of your hunting will be over placed bait this upcoming season IF baiting in the Southern Zone becomes legal?


----------



## rex upshaw

BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.
> 
> They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.



did you grow up hunting over bait?  do you think hunting over a bait pile is fair chase?  

i did not grow up hunting over corn piles, nor do i see it as fair chase.  we, the people who are against it, don't feel that it is right and think it greatly increases a "hunter's" chance at shooting a deer, taking any sort of woodsmanship out of it.  and if you are going to argue that it doesn't aid in your chances to shoot deer, then why push so strongly for it?  if you want to just hold deer on your property, you could designate a 1 acre area (that has a feeder full of corn) as off limits and thus your food source is still there.

it's sad to see the decline from generation to generation.  i feel really bad for our kids and their kids, as what they will call hunting, will bare little resemblance to what thos ebefore us knew it as.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Red350SS said:


> I can tell you one thing about David Knight, as I have known him for over 30 years....if he says something about hunting and/or wildlife, he has researched it and knows what he is talking about. I personally do not have a care if the bill passes or not, but I feel that if I had to choose sides in this case I would more than likely side with David on it. He walks the walk and talks the talk....he is for real.





Rep. Knight is a shinning star. I have asked my Rep., who is a rookie, to look to Rep. for guidance during this first term.


----------



## georgiabuck6

"A house divided will not stand" I agree with you bone head, feeds into the anti's, all our arguing between us. I may not hunt over bait when its legal but I dang sure aint gonna tell the next guy how to hunt within the Laws. and I'm sure not gonna have a public peeing match with the people that are supposed to be on my side...


BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.
> 
> They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.


----------



## UYD4L

rex upshaw said:


> i guess you guys that are arguing for putting it out for women and children are also the same group that don't want kids football/soccer/baseball games to keep score?  this is part of the reason our society is becoming a bunch of pansies.



Look Rex, I never supported the bill or baiting for that reason or for any other.  The question was how would you use it if it passed.  I don't think bait is a necessary or effective method for me to meet my goals so I probably wont use it personally.  However, I do think it could help someone looking to get a doe up close.  The women and children I referred to don't have the bow range I have. And they don't have the confidence when it comes to bow hunting, because they haven't killed a deer with their bow.

I don't see a whole lot of difference between letting someone get their first bow kill over bait and letting someone shoot the first button head they see with their rifle.  Its normal to give people some leniency on their first kill. If its legal and those I am referring to wanted to use it I would be fine with that.  Its not all about keeping score to me.


----------



## huntfourfun

gravedigger83 said:


> Dang I did not know Bob doesn't hunt
> 
> I am sure you know him personally right.
> 
> I am sure that him not wanting small land owners around his property to bait and draw the deer that he and his grandkids where hunting had nothing to do with this.......
> 
> Oh wait that is what he told Tony when they were talking in the committee room.So i guess I'll go with that..
> 
> Just the Facts boys lets stick with them



I hunt land next o Bob's land.........heck.......the big bucks bed on our place anyways...........


----------



## LonePine

jbroadnax said:


> Feeding will also help with encouraging my son to hunt because he will bore less easily if he is able to see game more frequently.



This is not a personal attack and is not directed at you JB, I'm glad that you are involving your son in hunting.

But I've heard this argument repeatedly made by people in favor of baiting.  How did we become hunters without a pile of corn?  I sat over and over again without seeing deer when I was getting started and it never drove me away from deer hunting.  It taught me to be patient and made it even more special when I finally did see or even managed to kill a deer.  Just another example of the instant gratification expected by today's society.


----------



## GA DAWG

I'm anti having a dang 12 deer limit myself..These same goverment folk that DONT HAVE A CLUE passed that to..Without ever setting foot in the woods..I just sucked it up and am still hunting today..Same as I'll be doing this year now that corn is legal..


----------



## CamoCop

Meriwether Mike said:


> I would certainly hope that GON is going to divide their Truck Buck Contest into a "hunters" and "baiters" category? Giving away two trucks is going to get expensive!  GON will also have to add a question category to the "baiters" entry form for the type of bait you had out.



no, the catergories will have to change to "whiners" and "baiters"


----------



## bm708

jbroadnax said:


> Everyone just needs to continue hunt by any method they choose regardless of whether or not the bill passes the Senate.  I believe most of the hunters complaining about the bill have never hunted legally over bait.  The truth is baiting does not guarantee success.  I have hunted Kansas the last 4 years and hunted over bait and natural food on many of my “sits”.  I have witnessed on many counts deer walking right by a mound of corn in subzero temps and never even give it a glance.  Deer will almost always prefer natural food.  Will I feed if the bill passes?  Heck yeah.  I will also continue to plant numerous acres of summer and fall food plots.  I will supplement the plots with corn or peanuts.  This will guarantee in the event we have a drought in October, which has become quite common, the deer will still have something to eat.  Feeding will also help with encouraging my son to hunt because he will bore less easily if he is able to see game more frequently.    I will certainly teach him how hunt keeping the wind in your favor, how to hunt deer sign, and teach him good marksmanship, etc.    If the baiting bill passes, it will also become easier to keep our hog population in check which is a real problem to say the least.



So I can shoot deer at night if I want to???


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Lance45lb said:


> This is not a personal attack and is not directed at you JB, I'm glad that you are involving your son in hunting.
> 
> But I've heard this argument repeatedly made by people in favor of baiting.  How did we become hunters without a pile of corn?  I sat over and over again without seeing deer when I was getting started and it never drove me away from deer hunting.  It taught me to be patient and made it even more special when I finally did see or even managed to kill a deer.  Just another example of the instant gratification expected by today's society.



Rep. Setzler pointed to his son from the Well last night and stated that his son would like to shoot a deer over bait but that he respected his son and the heritage of ethical hunting Georgia and he would not justify any hopes of immediate gratification with the *******ization of the sport.

We do still have folks who understand. Plenty of them!


----------



## Just 1 More

bm708 said:


> So I can shoot deer at night if I want to???



OOops... this might be the dumbest


----------



## Throwback

bm708 said:


> So I can shoot deer at night if I want to???



yes you can if you want to. 


T


----------



## Just 1 More

We run feeders YEAR ROUND, both corn and high protien feed,  and this will take the worry out of checking feeders during deer season or walking within the 200 yard zone during deer season. I seriously doubt anyone on out club would sit directly over a feeder.. or even within sight of one.. but, this also relieves that pesky game warden discretion of hunting a trail leading to or from a feeder


----------



## CamoCop

rex upshaw said:


> did you grow up hunting over bait?  do you think hunting over a bait pile is fair chase?
> 
> i did not grow up hunting over corn piles, nor do i see it as fair chase.  we, the people who are against it, don't feel that it is right and think it greatly increases a "hunter's" chance at shooting a deer, taking any sort of woodsmanship out of it.  and if you are going to argue that it doesn't aid in your chances to shoot deer, then why push so strongly for it?  if you want to just hold deer on your property, you could designate a 1 acre area (that has a feeder full of corn) as off limits and thus your food source is still there.
> 
> it's sad to see the decline from generation to generation.  i feel really bad for our kids and their kids, as what they will call hunting, will bare little resemblance to what thos ebefore us knew it as.



regardless of what you think, bait is not a magic lamp with a genie.  if you are sitting up wind of it and the deer can smell you, they won't approach.  if the deer see you, they will not approach.  just like hunting any other way, baiting is just another tool that if not used correctly, will not work.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Out of curiosity, how many of you 

1. watched the proceedings last night?

2. It was your first time really watching the process?


----------



## GA DAWG

Throwback said:


> yes you can if you want to.
> 
> 
> T


Thats what I was thinking..Anybody can shoot them at night if they want to


----------



## elfiii

BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.
> 
> They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.



And the pro-baiters? What are they doing?

Answer: Forcing their opinion on others.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.



I've never whizzed on an electric fence but I'm pretty sure it ain't a good idea.

Some people don't have to experience a thing to understand the consequences. 

Others may only learn from their own folly.


----------



## CamoCop

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Rep. Setzler pointed to his son from the Well last night and stated that his son would like to shoot a deer over bait but that he respected his son and the heritage of ethical hunting Georgia and he would not justify any hopes of immediate gratification with the *******ization of the sport.
> 
> We do still have folks who understand. Plenty of them!



so your saying Rep. Setzler sets the standards of "ethics" and "morals"?  what is unethical about baiting that is not with wearing a charcoal lined camo suit while blowing into a grunt call and holding a centerfire rifle with a 4-16x50mm scope???  to me hunting is not a "sport".  in "sports" we keep score and have a winner and a loser.  i do none of this when hunting.  i hunt because i love too, not because i am trying to beat your "score".  seems to me that a high percentage of "anti-baiters" are the "trophy hunters" who keep "score" when hunting.  maybe if they would try to relax, quit worrying about how other people hunt and have fun...they wouldn't be so up tight and "holier than thou" towards everyone else....just say'n


----------



## Randy

Throwback said:


> yes you can if you want to.
> 
> 
> T


That is wrong.  You better ask a game warden about that.


----------



## Throwback

Randy said:


> That is wrong.  You better ask a game warden about that.



he didn't ask if it was legal he asked if he could do it .

T


----------



## nickel back

GA DAWG said:


> I'm anti having a dang 12 deer limit myself..These same goverment folk that DONT HAVE A CLUE passed that to..Without ever setting foot in the woods..I just sucked it up and am still hunting today..Same as I'll be doing this year now that corn is legal..



corn is not legal yet.......


----------



## nickel back

bm708 said:


> So I can shoot deer at night if I want to???



not yet but,give it a few years and there just may be a bill for that to......


----------



## PWalls

Lease prices gonna go up now you think?


----------



## GA DAWG

PWalls said:


> Lease prices gonna go up now you think?


They should go down now because folks will be killing fewer deer and give leases up!


----------



## UYD4L

elfiii said:


> And the pro-baiters? What are they doing?
> 
> Answer: Forcing their opinion on others.



Pro-baiters are saying you must bait?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.
> 
> They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.



Whether shooting deer over bait is right or wrong, ethical or unethical, the logic of your post is completely fouled up.

You imply that your opinion is not valid unless you have participated in the activity so I ask you this:

I have never shot a deer with a spotlight.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
I have never shot a deer inside a fenced enclosure.  Does that mean I'm not fit to form an opinion on whether that is fair chase or not?
I have never shot a deer out of season.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
I have never trespassed to shoot a deer.  Does that mean I can't form an opinion on that behavior?
I have never shot an animal of any kind from a vehicle or boat under power.  Does that mean my opinion on that behavior is invalid?
We could expand this beyond hunting.  There are a ton of things I've never done that I know are wrong.  They are wrong whether I've done them or not.

Since you brought up the anti-hunters, I'll say this just helps them paint us in a negative light.  In the past I've heard people make remarks that depict a slob hunter shooting some poor dumb deer over a bait pile and I've always been able to point out that this behavior is not legal in Georgia and therefore, as it pertains to Georgia, they were describing a poacher and not a legal, ethical hunter and this was undeniably true.  I guess I can't use that argument against the anti-hunters any more.  It always stopped them dead in their tracks.  Seriously, this just feeds the image of the slob hunter which is not appealing or sympathetic to the non-hunting public.  I don't care what the anti-hunters think.  We will never change their minds.  But we must avoid doing things that make it easier for the anti-hunters to convince the non-hunting public (a larger portion of voters than those either anti or pro-hunting) that we are just a bunch of slob hunters and that there is no sport in our great sport at all.


----------



## nickel back

HuntinDawg89 said:


> Whether shooting deer over bait is right or wrong, ethical or unethical, the logic of your post is completely fouled up.
> 
> You imply that your opinion is not valid unless you have participated in the activity so I ask you this:
> 
> I have never shot a deer with a spotlight.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
> I have never shot a deer inside a fenced enclosure.  Does that mean I'm not fit to form an opinion on whether that is fair chase or not?
> I have never shot a deer out of season.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
> I have never trespassed to shoot a deer.  Does that mean I can't form an opinion on that behavior?
> I have never shot an animal of any kind from a vehicle or boat under power.  Does that mean my opinion on that behavior is invalid?
> We could expand this beyond hunting.  There are a ton of things I've never done that I know are wrong.  They are wrong whether I've done them or not.
> 
> Since you brought up the anti-hunters, I'll say this just helps them paint us in a negative light.  In the past I've heard people make remarks that depict a slob hunter shooting some poor dumb deer over a bait pile and I've always been able to point out that this behavior is not legal in Georgia and therefore, as it pertains to Georgia, they were describing a poacher and not a legal, ethical hunter and this was undeniably true.  I guess I can't use that argument against the anti-hunters any more.  It always stopped them dead in their tracks.  Seriously, this just feeds the image of the slob hunter which is not appealing or sympathetic to the non-hunting public.  I don't care what the anti-hunters think.  We will never change their minds.  But we must avoid doing things that make it easier for the anti-hunters to convince the non-hunting public (a larger portion of voters than those either anti or pro-hunting) that we are just a bunch of slob hunters and that there is no sport in our great sport at all.



pretty good post


----------



## catch22

*277*



Mechanicaldawg said:


> Out of curiosity, how many of you
> 
> 1. watched the proceedings last night?
> 
> 2. It was your first time really watching the process?



I wathced most of the proceedings about this bill and yes this was my 1st time watching the process.

Frankly, I was really dissapointed with presenters on both sides of the issue.  "Most" of their arguments were full of scare tactics and mis-truths......there were some on each side that seemed to know what they were talking about and presented good arguments for their cause, but they were in the minority.

I now know that this is how politics works (on all issues) and it makes me sick......

I was for the bill being passed, but not in the manner in which it was argued.

just my take


----------



## CamoCop

elfiii said:


> And the pro-baiters? What are they doing?
> 
> Answer: Forcing their opinion on others.



the issue is not about opinions but laws.  loosening up the baiting laws forces nothing on the anti-baiters.  they can keep on justifying their food plots and leave the corn for the baiters.  however keeping the current baiting law in existance DOES force others to follow it even if they don't agree with it.


----------



## bm708

Randy said:


> That is wrong.  You better ask a game warden about that.



But using the Baiter's logic if it does not affect you then I should be able to do it. So as long as I shoot deer at night on my own property that is ok right???


----------



## General Lee

Mechanicaldawg said:


> We do still have folks who understand. Plenty of them!


Yep 48 of them..............


----------



## DeadEye09

*I know, Im an idiot..*

Pardon my ignorance, in trying to look up more about HB 277, I am not finding very much.

Can someone give me the low-down on what this bill proposes? Is it only allowing baiting for hogs in the southern zone, or is there more to it?

Again, sorry for my ignorance, with school and tests, I havent had a ton of time to do my research. Thanks guys.


----------



## nickel back

bm708 said:


> But using the Baiter's logic if it does not affect you then I should be able to do it. So as long as I shoot deer at night on my own property that is ok right???



Ummm,post #251.......


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

catch22 said:


> I wathced most of the proceedings about this bill and yes this was my 1st time watching the process.
> 
> Frankly, I was really dissapointed with presenters on both sides of the issue.  "Most" of their arguments were full of scare tactics and mis-truths......there were some on each side that seemed to know what they were talking about and presented good arguments for their cause, but they were in the minority.
> 
> I now know that this is how politics works (on all issues) and it makes me sick......
> 
> I was for the bill being passed, but not in the manner in which it was argued.
> 
> just my take



"Those that respect the law and love sausage should watch neither being made." -  Mark Twain

I've been watching these critters for 10-12 years now and I still get queasy when they start grinding and filling the casing.

Not just this topic, but any of them.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> Why not.  Texas hunting ranches stake their bussiness on it daily.  It works.


Gauranteed opportunity, not kill.



PWalls said:


> Lease prices gonna go up now you think?



Why? Did they go up when cross bows were made legal?

If corn draws the deer to the pile like it has drawn folks to this thread.........................there wont be any deer left in South GA


----------



## UYD4L

DeadEye09 said:


> Pardon my ignorance, in trying to look up more about HB 277, I am not finding very much.
> 
> Can someone give me the low-down on what this bill proposes? Is it only allowing baiting for hogs in the southern zone, or is there more to it?
> 
> Again, sorry for my ignorance, with school and tests, I havent had a ton of time to do my research. Thanks guys.



It would make hunting deer and hogs over bait legal on private property in the southern zone with the landowner's permission.  However, bait cannot be placed within 50 yards of a property line without the adjacent landowner's permission.

It would also make hunting hogs over bait legal on private property in th northern zone.  But for all other game animals (including deer) the 200 yards and out of sight rule would remain.


----------



## BONE HEAD

Rex, I have been hunting for 40 + years in florida and georgia I did not grow up hunting over bait and I do not think hunting over bait is fair chase. However I do not think Our definition of fair chase Should be imposed on others. I don't think dog hunting is fair chase but who am I to tell them "I think it is wrong therefore you cannot do it".

 I agree with you more than you think but you need to realize that hunting is a big tent that houses many different cultures and traditions.


----------



## 440Mopar

Dang the deer whens duck season in ??haha


----------



## Mac

interesting read,  some folks have to much time on their hands.  LOL


----------



## Randy

HuntinDawg89 said:


> Whether shooting deer over bait is right or wrong, ethical or unethical, the logic of your post is completely fouled up.
> 
> You imply that your opinion is not valid unless you have participated in the activity so I ask you this:
> 
> I have never shot a deer with a spotlight.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
> I have never shot a deer inside a fenced enclosure.  Does that mean I'm not fit to form an opinion on whether that is fair chase or not?
> I have never shot a deer out of season.  Does that mean I should not condemn it?
> I have never trespassed to shoot a deer.  Does that mean I can't form an opinion on that behavior?
> I have never shot an animal of any kind from a vehicle or boat under power.  Does that mean my opinion on that behavior is invalid?
> We could expand this beyond hunting.  There are a ton of things I've never done that I know are wrong.  They are wrong whether I've done them or not.
> 
> Since you brought up the anti-hunters, I'll say this just helps them paint us in a negative light.  In the past I've heard people make remarks that depict a slob hunter shooting some poor dumb deer over a bait pile and I've always been able to point out that this behavior is not legal in Georgia and therefore, as it pertains to Georgia, they were describing a poacher and not a legal, ethical hunter and this was undeniably true.  I guess I can't use that argument against the anti-hunters any more.  It always stopped them dead in their tracks.  Seriously, this just feeds the image of the slob hunter which is not appealing or sympathetic to the non-hunting public.  I don't care what the anti-hunters think.  We will never change their minds.  But we must avoid doing things that make it easier for the anti-hunters to convince the non-hunting public (a larger portion of voters than those either anti or pro-hunting) that we are just a bunch of slob hunters and that there is no sport in our great sport at all.


Pro-baites don't care.  It is ONLY about putting meat in the freezer.  The will argue it is no worse that slautering a cow in a pen.  They have a point.


----------



## BONE HEAD

Huntindawg,  you miss my point....yet you illustrate it quite well. my point is just because YOU have formed an opinion that it is wrong you feel you are justified in forcing it on others.


----------



## Just 1 More

Randy said:


> Pro-baites don't care.  It is ONLY about putting meat in the freezer.  The will argue it is no worse that slautering a cow in a pen.  They have a point.



You're spewing crap again... not all in favor of baiting are looking to "fill the freezer" .. don"t out everyone in the same catagory


----------



## Randy

CamoCop said:


> the issue is not about opinions but laws.  loosening up the baiting laws forces nothing on the anti-baiters.  they can keep on justifying their food plots and leave the corn for the baiters.  however keeping the current baiting law in existance DOES force others to follow it even if they don't agree with it.


Are you saying we should not have any laws?  This laws does in fact force people in the southern part of Georgia to bait if they want to have any animals on their place.  Animals go where the food is.


----------



## fatboy84




----------



## 440Mopar

Are you saying we should not have any laws? This laws does in fact force people in the southern part of Georgia to bait if they want to have any animals on their place. Animals go where the food is. 
   LIKE YALL AIN'T BAITIN ALREADY


----------



## Randy

Just 1 More said:


> You're spewing crap again... not all in favor of baiting are looking to "fill the freezer" .. don"t out everyone in the same catagory



Sorry that is the arguement I heard.  I have not heard any of them yet say "I am not a good enough hunter to pattern deer and study their existing food sources and learn to hunt them on their on terms."  What would a good reason be?  I have heard them say to get kids more easily involved.....which relates to not having to teach them to learn deer behavior.  Same thing.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

BONE HEAD said:


> ...I do not think hunting over bait is fair chase. However I do not think Our definition of fair chase Should be imposed on others...





BONE HEAD said:


> Huntindawg,  you miss my point....yet you illustrate it quite well. my point is just because YOU have formed an opinion that it is wrong you feel you are justified in forcing it on others.



Well unless you are for anarchy we have to have laws and laws are an imposition of someone's morality on everyone.  Why is it illegal to shoot deer at night with a light?  Because somebody decided it wasn't fair chase or was immoral/unethical and got enough people to agree with them to pass a law.  Same reason murder is illegal or armed robbery or rape, etc.

Unless you want a free for all and complete anarchy (and there are those who do) then the fact that some people's opinions are going to be forced on others is inescapable.  Someone's opinions on what is moral/acceptable/healthy/fair/equitable/in the public interest/etc., is going to restrict what other people are allowed to do as long as we have a society of laws.


----------



## UYD4L

Randy said:


> This laws does in fact force people in the southern part of Georgia to bait if they want to have any animals on their place.



If you actually believe that, then I can see why you feel so strongly about this...


----------



## Randy

440Mopar said:


> LIKE YALL AIN'T BAITIN ALREADY


That would be correct.


----------



## CamoCop

UYD4L said:


> If you actually believe that, then I can see why you feel so strongly about this...



x2!


----------



## secondseason

UYD4L said:


> If you actually believe that, then I can see why you feel so strongly about this...


....x3


----------



## Randy

UYD4L said:


> If you actually believe that, then I can see why you feel so strongly about this...


I do and it is strengthened by the commenst for baiting.  Many times people have commented on here that their neighbors we baiting and this allows them to compete with them without breaking the law.  I believe the issue is real, see post 52 in this thread!


----------



## dkennedy

Just 1 More said:


> We run feeders YEAR ROUND, both corn and high protien feed,  and this will take the worry out of checking feeders during deer season or walking within the 200 yard zone during deer season. I seriously doubt anyone on out club would sit directly over a feeder.. or even within sight of one.. but, this also relieves that pesky game warden discretion of hunting a trail leading to or from a feeder



X2


----------



## Smokepoler

*Good quote and Post*



Mechanicaldawg said:


> "Those that respect the law and love sausage should watch neither being made." -  Mark Twain
> 
> I've been watching these critters for 10-12 years now and I still get queasy when they start grinding and filling the casing.
> 
> Not just this topic, but any of them.




This has got to be the one post everyone can  agree on


----------



## UYD4L

Randy said:


> Pro-baites don't care.  It is ONLY about putting meat in the freezer.  The will argue it is no worse that slautering a cow in a pen.  They have a point.



I'm assuming you're talking about our discussion the other day.  First, I'm not a pro-baiter.  Second, I clearly stated hunting wasn't only about killing/putting meat in the freezer.

What I said was an ethical stance that no one would be able to argue with would be that hunting is an alternative way to feed your family.  And from that point of view almost no method of hunting is worse than slaughtering a cow in a pen.  

It is because hunting is considered a sport and a pursuit of a trophy that all the ethical questions come up.  

My point being that the general public would be more likely to continue its approval of hunting if they perceived it as a manner of feeding your family than if they view it as a sport or trophy quest.


----------



## Randy

UYD4L said:


> I'm assuming you're talking about our discussion the other day.  First, I'm not a pro-baiter.  Second, I clearly stated hunting wasn't only about killing/putting meat in the freezer.
> 
> What I said was an ethical stance that no one would be able to argue with would be that hunting is an alternative way to feed your family.  And from that point of view almost no method of hunting is worse than slaughtering a cow in a pen.
> 
> It is because hunting is considered a sport and a pursuit of a trophy that all the ethical questions come up.
> 
> My point being that the general public would be more likely to continue its approval of hunting if they perceived it as a manner of feeding your family than if they view it as a sport or trophy quest.


Right so you want the public to believe it is about meat gathering.  I think that is what I said.  But what you really mean is it really is about sport but you don't want the public to know that.  Oh OK.


----------



## JBowers

catch22 said:


> I now know that this is how politics works (on all issues) and it makes me sick......


 
Now the important question:  Do you still respect sausage? And, is that respect enhanced or diminished?


----------



## CamoCop

for me hunting is not a sport, it is a passion.  i do it not because i need to feed my family but because i love it.  i need no other reason to justify it's existance to anyone.


----------



## UYD4L

Randy said:


> Right so you want the public to believe it is about meat gathering.  I think that is what I said.  But what you really mean is it really is about sport but you don't want the public to know that.  Oh OK.



You implied that I said baiting should be legal because it was no worse than slaughtering a cow in a pen.  Thats not what I said.  I was making a point about public perception of hunting not arguing about making baiting legal it wasn't even in a baiting thread.

I think hunting is about many things.  Like I said in another thread its mostly about fellowship and spending time in the outdoors for me.  Sport and meat would be somewhere down the list. 

And the point that I was making is that we should spend as much time promoting hunting in general in a positive light as we spend picking at each other.  And I'm not saying just lie to the public.  We should actually be as happy about the experience of being outdoors and the summer sausage, as we are about the rack.  Which I think a lot of us already are it just doesn't come across that way to the general public.


----------



## catch22

*sausage*



JBowers said:


> Now the important question:  Do you still respect sausage? And, is that respect enhanced or diminished?



I know how sausage is made and I don't care its still GOOOOOOD!!  

now that I know how law is made, I dont want to know.....you know what i mean


----------



## ALL4HUNTIN

DANG IT...... I JUST SPENT $1200 ON THAT CAMO CORN TO PUT OUT 

:


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> Bob Lane doesn't hunt deer.
> 
> Bob Lane did not hold the bill at the request of GWF. He held the bill because he is committed to the principle that biological wildlife management decisions should be made by professional wildlife biologists, not politicians.
> 
> He exercised his authority as Chairman no different than any other Chairman, including the current Chairman of the Game, Fish & Parks who stacked the subcommittee hearing on HB 277 with proponents of baiting and then scheduled a full Committee meeting when most committee members opposed to HB 277 could not make the meeting.
> 
> Just the facts.




You mean Bob Lane from Statesboro? The one that lives out on Lakeview road?  Does not hunt?  Do you live under a rock?


----------



## groundhawg

HuntinDawg89 said:


> And don't give me the nonsense about baiting not helping that much and not making it much easier - IF IT DOESN'T HELP THAT MUCH WHY WERE SO MANY PEOPLE DYING TO GET THE RIGHT TO KILL OVER BAIT?????????



If it does not matter/help that much then why are so many people dying to STOP the right to kill over bait????????


----------



## Just 1 More

G Duck said:


> You mean Bob Lane from Statesboro? The one that lives out on Lakeview road?  Does not hunt?  Do you live under a rock?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

groundhawg said:


> If it does not matter/help that much then why are so many people dying to STOP the right to kill over bait????????



I don't understand your question.  Those who oppose baiting (primarily) clearly believe that baiting makes it easier.  The most fanatical PROPONENTS of baiting assert that it doesn't make it that much easier, which begs the question "then why is it so vital that you be legally able to "hunt" over bait?"

Nobody disputes the fact that those against baiting think it makes a difference.


----------



## G Duck

Im not pro bait, but I am against bashing the whole southern part of the state because a bunch of water head politicians, (which we all elected) voted this thing this far. To say that this is a big conspiracy theory is just crazy. With budget shortfalls, and real problems in the state and country, this is the last thing the politicians need to be worried about. If you think it is just a southern zone problem with bait, you are out of touch.


----------



## soggy bottom Buck

I think they should have to use stick and string, and also cut back on the deer days, give the deer a sporting chance, Cut the deer tags back to 3 2bucks, 1 doe


----------



## CamoCop

just another tool in the tool box.  camouflage and scent killer used independently or together drastically improve your odds of killing a deer then baiting alone.


----------



## Just 1 More

nickel back said:


> not yet but,give it a few years and there just may be a bill for that to......



Has that been the case in any other states that allow hunting over bait???


----------



## Red350SS

G Duck said:


> Im not pro bait, but I am against bashing the whole southern part of the state because a bunch of water head politicians, (which we all elected) voted this thing this far. To say that this is a big conspiracy theory is just crazy. With budget shortfalls, and real problems in the state and country, this is the last thing the politicians need to be worried about. If you think it is just a southern zone problem with bait, you are out of touch.



Good point......with all the trouble the states/countrys/etc's economies are in, this is a big issue in the overall big picture our politicians are even wasting time with?? Scary.....real scary. IMO "leasure" issues should not even be brought up until the economy is straightened out to a point where "leasure" activities are actually pursuable....


----------



## kasey

Ahhh. nothing better than killing deer over a pile of corn on Sunday morning and then picking up a twelve pack of budweiser to celebrate.:huh


----------



## Just 1 More

Red350SS said:


> Good point......with all the trouble the states/countrys/etc's economies are in, this is a big issue in the overall big picture our politicians are even wasting time with?? Scary.....real scary. IMO "leasure" issues should not even be brought up until the economy is straightened out to a point where "leasure" activities are actually pursuable....



Then that would be NEVER


----------



## widowmaker1

it just hit me-this is a good thing for the northern zone-the # of hunters in the southern zone is fixing to quadrupile while the # of hunters in the north is gonna drop signifficantly-my cousin just told me that if it does indeed pass his entire club was lookin for a tract in the southern zone.


----------



## badfaulkner

"Bait's gon' be the death of real huntin'," said the anti-corn hunter, decked out in his Scentlok vertigo camo, 21st century compound bow [or A-Bolt with Leopold scope], rangefinder or Zeiss binoculars, grunt call, Code Blue buck lure, doe decoy, and $400 Lonewolf climber over Tecomate food plots. "Usin' bait's not huntin'. Just killin'.  People who use that need crutches."


----------



## Just 1 More

badfaulkner said:


> "Bait's gon' be the death of real huntin'," said the anti-corn hunter, decked out in his Scentlok vertigo camo, 21st century compound bow [or A-Bolt with Leopold scope], rangefinder or Zeiss binoculars, grunt call, Code Blue buck lure, doe decoy, and $400 Lonewolf climber *over Tecomate food plots*. "Usin' bait's not huntin'. Just killin'.  People who use that need crutches."


----------



## huntfourfun

widowmaker1 said:


> it just hit me-this is a good thing for the northern zone-the # of hunters in the southern zone is fixing to quadrupile while the # of hunters in the north is gonna drop signifficantly-my cousin just told me that if it does indeed pass his entire club was lookin for a tract in the southern zone.



Thought everybody in the Northern Zone was against it?  How can that be?


----------



## G Duck

widowmaker1 said:


> it just hit me-this is a good thing for the northern zone-the # of hunters in the southern zone is fixing to quadrupile while the # of hunters in the north is gonna drop signifficantly-my cousin just told me that if it does indeed pass his entire club was lookin for a tract in the southern zone.



Until the rest of the state can be passed by the DNR without it going before the house and senate again. 
Just wait.
PS  We are now running special pricing for Northern Zone hunters in our club


----------



## CamoCop

badfaulkner said:


> "Bait's gon' be the death of real huntin'," said the anti-corn hunter, decked out in his Scentlok vertigo camo, 21st century compound bow [or A-Bolt with Leopold scope], rangefinder or Zeiss binoculars, grunt call, Code Blue buck lure, doe decoy, $400 Lonewolf climber *loaded up on a badboy buggy over look'n a* Tecomate food plot. "Usin' bait's not huntin'. Just killin'.  People who use that need crutches."



fixed it for you


----------



## 1022

Maybe if all the shooters and flatlanders stay in the south now us mountain hunters will have more room .................


----------



## 270 guy

G Duck said:


> Heres a question, Where would you rather be during and afternoon hunt during peak rut?
> A. In the middle of a 2000 acre tract of pines and palmettos with a feeder in South Ga?
> or
> B. Or in a Tripod overlooking a 50 acre cut corn field in Middle Ga?



In the hardwoods over looking a scrape line and some trails that cross. Out of the two the 50 acre cut corn field the does will be eating in that field at dusk most likely.


----------



## huntfourfun

270 guy said:


> In the hardwoods over looking a scrape line and some trails that cross. Out of the two the 50 acre cut corn field the does will be eating in that field at dusk most likely.



Hunting over acorns is by far easier than carrying 50 lbs bags of corn around..........plus they like the acorns over corn..........seems like a"corn" hunters have is easier.............


----------



## G Duck

Maybe now I can have a use for the 55 gal drum full of live oak acorns that I rake up every year from the front yard


----------



## CamoCop

BONE HEAD said:


> Rex, I have been hunting for 40 + years in florida and georgia I did not grow up hunting over bait and I do not think hunting over bait is fair chase. However I do not think Our definition of fair chase Should be imposed on others. I don't think dog hunting is fair chase but who am I to tell them "I think it is wrong therefore you cannot do it".
> 
> I agree with you more than you think but you need to realize that hunting is a big tent that houses many different cultures and traditions.



how about bear hunters?  bear hunting using bait is not fair chase either?  of course it's not!  because we ALL know if bait is out, game animals have to show up...they simply have no choice in the matter.  kinda like dog hunting, the deer don't have a choice in where to run.  they HAVE to run to the nearest road and stop until they hear or feel a shot.


----------



## widowmaker1

huntfourfun said:


> Thought everybody in the Northern Zone was against it?  How can that be?



im speaking of the out of staters-the guys im talkin bout live in st augustine fl.


----------



## 270 guy

BONE HEAD said:


> I find it very interesting How so many of the anti bait crowd are so quick to condemn something they they say they have never done and have vowed to never do, it reminds me of the anti hunting crowd.
> 
> They have no problem trying to force their opinions on to others.


EXACTLY! I have never seen such a bunch of whinners in my life. 

If you want to do it fine if not move along and don't use it. If your not happy then put your weapon on the shelf and stay home and watch TV.

 Call it Hunting or shooting whatever makes you happy both have the exact same end result if both are successful and that is a dead deer in the freezer. 

It's funny how just a week ago many called  folks that hunt over corn poachers or just shooters and not hunters and now if this passes the rest of the way they all will be equal and all will become just mere shooters

Now all the deer will be killed off and GA will be the only state with no deer because it was made legal to sit over your bait instead of 200 yards away from it.

SC, TX, KY and Fl seem to still have deer and all allow baiting imagine that. I guess some think GA is some magical state that will not be the same as all the other states that allow bait.

Hunter or shooter whatever word you use that makes you feel better then the other guy go do it the way you like and others will legally do theres now.


----------



## Nitram4891

Maybe it will give people more confidence to be selective and not shoot small bucks/young does.


----------



## rex upshaw

Nitram4891 said:


> Maybe it will give people more confidence to be selective and not shoot small bucks/young does.



Keep telling yourself that.


----------



## Nitram4891

rex upshaw said:


> Keep telling yourself that.



I will.  And I also will keep telling myself that all the people up here will go shoot deer over corn in south GA and help our woods out.


----------



## 270 guy

Lance45lb said:


> This is not a personal attack and is not directed at you JB, I'm glad that you are involving your son in hunting.
> 
> But I've heard this argument repeatedly made by people in favor of baiting.  How did we become hunters without a pile of corn?  I sat over and over again without seeing deer when I was getting started and it never drove me away from deer hunting.  It taught me to be patient and made it even more special when I finally did see or even managed to kill a deer.  Just another example of the instant gratification expected by today's society.




  Kids today have to many other things to do or play with to want to sit in the woods all day or all week or maybe even month and not see a deer. Most would rather sit at a computer or nintendo game playing that instead of being bored sitting in a stand not seeing anything. The use of Bait Plots or corn helps draw the deer in so they can at least see more der or game and not be so bored. 

I know I shot my first deer dog hunting in SC. My dad wasn't a big hunter and his dad wasn't a hunter period. They hunted some rabbits and squirrel and such but Hunting deer like my kids know wasn't there. 

If you have a place with plenty of sign and plenty of food sources to hold deer on you property then great you don't eed plots of feeders. If you hunt pine flats with nothing but gallberries head high and so thick you can't walk or see in them then plots and feedes work GREAT. 

I have never hunted over corn in GA and most likely wont because where we hunt there is plenty of food available and the owner plants a few bait plots to keep them coming around.


----------



## nickel back

Nitram4891 said:


> Maybe it will give people more confidence to be selective and not shoot small bucks/young does.



Proponents of baiting say it allows hunters to be more selective, helping them avoid harvesting immature bucks. However, South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings. Apparently, baiting hasn't helped S.C. hunters be more selective.


----------



## rex upshaw

270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits. This would be a little easier to swallow, if we had substantial information from wildlife biologist in Georgia, saying that this is best for the herd. I have not seen that to be the case.


----------



## Nitram4891

nickel back said:


> Proponents of baiting say it allows hunters to be more selective, helping them avoid harvesting immature bucks. However, South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings. Apparently, baiting hasn't helped S.C. hunters be more selective.


----------



## 270 guy

nickel back said:


> corn is not legal yet.......



Yes it is and has been for some time. Sitting in site of it isn't legal yet.


----------



## Randy

rex upshaw said:


> 270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits. This would be a little easier to swallow, if we had substantial information from wildlife biologist in Georgia, saying that this is best for the herd. I have not seen that to be the case.



This information is what has kept this from every reaching the floor before.  The current leader of the WRD would not allow this information this time.


----------



## rex upshaw

270, your argument about kids getting bored is part of the overall problem and one that has to do with this generation and parenting, or lack there of. When I grew up, we spent most of our time outside and didn't rot our brains with video games. Also, your point about wanting to see something every time they go out, is part of this instant gratification. How horrible it must be to not get your way, every time you sit in the deer stand. They will have to learn that real life doesn't mirror this idea.


----------



## GA DAWG

What kind of sweets to deer eat? I'd like to put some out for them in one of those south Ga counties that has lots of bear...


----------



## NCHillbilly

rex upshaw said:


> 270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits. This would be a little easier to swallow, if we had substantial information from wildlife biologist in Georgia, saying that this is best for the herd. I have not seen that to be the case.



Bait is legal here in NC, and in my part of the state, we have a 3-week gun season (Thanksgiving week-through early December,) two weeks of muzzleloader, and a long bow season. Our short season here has more to do with working around bear season, because they won't open gun deer season and bear season at the same time for some reason. In central NC where there is no bear season, deer gun season runs from mid-November to Jan. 1. We are allowed six deer, two of them can be bucks.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

nickel back said:


> South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings.



1) What are you calling a yearling?  What some people call yearlings, I call fawns, meaning deer that are less than one year old (during hunting season that would be anywhere from maybe 3-9 months of age depending on birth date and early vs. late season).  I am assuming when you say "yearling bucks" in the above post you are talking about 1 1/2 year old bucks sporting their first rack?

2) If you are calling bucks with their first rack "yearlings" (1 1/2 year old bucks), I would be shocked if Georgia's antlered deer harvest isn't comprised of at least 65% "yearlings" but we don't have any way to measure that except on WMA hunts where there is a check station.


----------



## 270 guy

nickel back said:


> Proponents of baiting say it allows hunters to be more selective, helping them avoid harvesting immature bucks. However, South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings. Apparently, baiting hasn't helped S.C. hunters be more selective.


Or maybe SC hunters don't care how big the racks are. Maybe they just like to HUNT deer.


----------



## GA DAWG

You cant compare SC and Ga deer herds..Heck most of SC dont even have a limit..They sure dont have a whole state thats qdm like Ga does..


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> 270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits. This would be a little easier to swallow, if we had substantial information from wildlife biologist in Georgia, saying that this is best for the herd. I have not seen that to be the case.



SC runs from Aug 15 until Jan 1st, FL not sure about bowsometime in Oct I gun hunt it runs from  Nov until mid Jan on private land. KY has a short season don't remember the dates. Tx is about like FL if memmory serves me.  FL has unlimited bucks and only 6 days for does. SC I believe was one buck a day and purchase doe tags, TX has limited Bucks and not sure on the does, KY was one buck and buy doe tags.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

nickel back said:


> Proponents of baiting say it allows hunters to be more selective, helping them avoid harvesting immature bucks. However, South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings. Apparently, baiting hasn't helped S.C. hunters be more selective.



With all due respect NB, our problem is related to no limits on bucks. We are hoping to get this taken care of shortly. It has nothing to do with baiting.


I think you will find the two main areas that have the highest percentage to be .1}the doghunting hotspots and 2} the upstate(no baiting), where the average hunter hunts 75 acres or less.


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> 270, your argument about kids getting bored is part of the overall problem and one that has to do with this generation and parenting, or lack there of. When I grew up, we spent most of our time outside and didn't rot our brains with video games. Also, your point about wanting to see something every time they go out, is part of this instant gratification. How horrible it must be to not get your way, every time you sit in the deer stand. They will have to learn that real life doesn't mirror this idea.



Rex I agree with you. My sons grew up playing outside and didn't have all the fangled games to play. The fact is times are changing and kids interest aren't the same as they were when we/I was younger.

 At one time you had to crank a handle to start your car just look at it now.


----------



## xs5875

my question is: "whats the difference between northern and southern zones?, i have never seen any statistics showing a population difference." If there is show me, but I havent seen it. So the extended season AND baiting will wipe out deer...everyone will limit out.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

GA DAWG said:


> You cant compare SC and Ga deer herds..Heck most of SC dont even have a limit..They sure dont have a whole state thats qdm like Ga does..



This may be true, but the last part of your statement is just comical to me.  If our pathetic rule about one buck having 4 points on one side equates to QDM then I'm an astronaut.


----------



## rex upshaw

270 guy said:


> SC runs from Aug 15 until Jan 1st, FL not sure about bowsometime in Oct I gun hunt it runs from  Nov until mid Jan on private land. KY has a short season don't remember the dates. Tx is about like FL if memmory serves me.  FL has unlimited bucks and only 6 days for does. SC I believe was one buck a day and purchase doe tags, TX has limited Bucks and not sure on the does, KY was one buck and buy doe tags.



i think it would be good, for comparison sake, to have a running list that shows which states allow baiting, the season dates and how many animals can be harvested.  i will start a thread and we can add to it.


----------



## UYD4L

xs5875 said:


> my question is: "whats the difference between northern and southern zones?, i have never seen any statistics showing a population difference." If there is show me, but I havent seen it. So the extended season AND baiting will wipe out deer...everyone will limit out.



The season isn't going to be extended.

I don't know anyone who wants to limit out but can't. If it was something they wanted to and they went hunting enough, everyone I know could have limited out last season but they all chose not to.  I don't think that'll change if baiting is legal in the south.


----------



## GA DAWG

HuntinDawg89 said:


> This may be true, but the last part of your statement is just comical to me.  If our pathetic rule about one buck having 4 points on one side equates to QDM then I'm an astronaut.


Its a step..I'll guarentee its helping.. Does Bama have it? Does South Carolina have it? Tennessee? North Carolina? Florida? We kill bigger deer than they do! A lot bigger now that one has to have 4 on one side..


----------



## CamoCop

rex upshaw said:


> 270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits. This would be a little easier to swallow, if we had substantial information from wildlife biologist in Georgia, saying that this is best for the herd. I have not seen that to be the case.



SC has the longest season in the country and Florida runs right along with Georgia's.  also in Florida you can shoot 2 bucks a day, every day.


----------



## Stick

Some of you had to see this when you looked in the mirror this morning.


----------



## nickel back

Catdaddy SC said:


> With all due respect NB, our problem is related to no limits on bucks. We are hoping to get this taken care of shortly. It has nothing to do with baiting.
> 
> 
> I think you will find the two main areas that have the highest percentage to be .1}the doghunting hotspots and 2} the upstate(no baiting), where the average hunter hunts 75 acres or less.



I maybe reading this wrong but,in this study it says that the best hunting is where baiting is not allowed in S.C.

now Im only going by what this says,I have never hunted S.C



http://www.wideerhunters.org/articles/SCbaitstudy.pdf


----------



## HuntinDawg89

GA DAWG said:


> Its a step..I'll guarentee its helping.. Does Bama have it? Does South Carolina have it? Tennessee? North Carolina? Florida? We kill bigger deer than they do! A lot bigger now that one has to have 4 on one side..



I don't know whether it is helping or not.  Whether other states have it or not is immaterial if we don't know whether it is even effective. [EDIT: Also, we have ALWAYS killed bigger deer on average than Alabama, Florida, SC & TN.  Probably partially due to soil conditions, etc. and largely due to the restocking of Georgia done with deer from Texas, Wisconsin, etc.]

My beef with point restrictions for a measure of QDM is that one of the goals of QDM as I understand it is to improve the quality of bucks and also the age structure (more bucks living to maturity).  The number of points has almost no correlation to maturity, especially when you are talking about just 4 on one side.  The first buck I ever shot back in 1984 was a 1 1/2 year old 8 pointer.  There are tons of 1 1/2 year old bucks that have 4 points on one side.  I think there is a great possibility that we are protecting the most inferior 1 1/2 year old bucks in the herd and allowing the best ones to be shot.  That is not QDM.  On the other hand, if you are going to make someone a criminal for pulling the trigger you HAVE to make it something that the shooter can KNOW before they pull the trigger.  Most folks can't KNOW that they are shooting a deer of a certain age class and most can't KNOW that they are shooting a deer with some certain minimum spread (and that is a flawed method as well, but better than points).  You can't make somebody a criminal because they shot a deer with a 15 3/4 in spread instead of the 16" minimum for example.  So I understand the need to use the number of points, I just don't think it is effective and might very well be detrimental from a game management perspective.

The only way that I can see our current statewide antler restrictions doing anything positive is just that some bucks won't get shot because the hunter couldn't get a good enough look to know how many points it had and so that deer may get another year older and there may be an extra mature buck here or there as a result.


----------



## UYD4L

nickel back said:


> I maybe reading this wrong but,in this study it says that the best hunting is where baiting is not allowed in S.C.
> 
> now Im only going by what this says,I have never hunted S.C
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.wideerhunters.org/articles/SCbaitstudy.pdf



Yeah but ya'll anti-baiters don't believe that study do you?  Ya'll think baiting works right:



HuntinDawg89 said:


> I don't understand your question.  Those who oppose baiting (primarily) clearly believe that baiting makes it easier.  The most fanatical PROPONENTS of baiting assert that it doesn't make it that much easier, which begs the question "then why is it so vital that you be legally able to "hunt" over bait?"
> 
> Nobody disputes the fact that those against baiting think it makes a difference.


----------



## rex upshaw

CamoCop said:


> SC has the longest season in the country and Florida runs right along with Georgia's.  also in Florida you can shoot 2 bucks a day, every day.



and many people from florida come to georgia to hunt, because the hunting is better.  you don't see many people from georgia heading to florida.  sure, genetics and age structure play a role, but if you are able to kill 2 bucks a day, it stands to reason that your hunting is not going to be that great.


----------



## nickel back

GA DAWG said:


> You cant compare SC and Ga deer herds..Heck most of SC dont even have a limit..They sure dont have a whole state thats qdm like Ga does..



why?every body compared Ga. to the other states that bait.


----------



## CamoCop

rex upshaw said:


> and many people from florida come to georgia to hunt, because the hunting is better.  you don't see many people from georgia heading to florida.  sure, genetics and age structure play a role, but if you are able to kill 2 bucks a day, it stands to reason that your hunting is not going to be that great.



hunters go to georgia for quality not quantity.  i see 4x the deer hunting florida than i ever did hunting georgia.  i guess this means a long time baiting state can still have a healthy deer herd.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

nickel back said:


> I maybe reading this wrong but,in this study it says that the best hunting is where baiting is not allowed in S.C.
> 
> now Im only going by what this says,I have never hunted S.C
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.wideerhunters.org/articles/SCbaitstudy.pdf



Here is a nice little tidbit from that study/report:

Ethically, support for baiting is often split among hunters, however non-hunters and antihunting
constituent groups typically do not support the practice. Controversy or lack of public
support for baiting most often involves perceptions of fair chase and this fair chase challenge
weakens public support not only for hunting programs, but also for wildlife conservation and
management programs that have historically been accepted (Peyton 1998). Hunting is a tradition
and an important tool with respect to deer management; however issues such as hunting deer
over bait jeopardize the continued acceptance of hunting by an increasingly skeptical public at
large (Williamson 2000).

Why can't people get their brains around this simple information?  Ultimately it will be the non-hunters who determine when and if we lose our right to hunt and this doesn't help us with them.


----------



## Buckfever

CamoCop said:


> how about bear hunters?  bear hunting using bait is not fair chase either?  of course it's not!  because we ALL know if bait is out, game animals have to show up...they simply have no choice in the matter.  kinda like dog hunting, the deer don't have a choice in where to run.  they HAVE to run to the nearest road and stop until they hear or feel a shot.



A bear or turkey may show up, but get caught shooting one over bait if the Bill makes it all the way through will cost someone a minimium of $1500 fine. Not saying you would, but we all know someone will try it. I'm so glad that this ammendment was put in there.


----------



## GA DAWG

I'm just thankful I want have to haul the tractor to south Ga this year and plant my bait plots!


----------



## nickel back

UYD4L said:


> Yeah but ya'll anti-baiters don't believe that study do you?  Ya'll think baiting works right:



Hmmm,I have posted many times on baiting,I know for a fact that I have said corn is a habit changer and is going to do more harm than good for us hunters.


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> Here is a nice little tidbit from that study/report:
> 
> Ethically, support for baiting is often split among hunters, however non-hunters and antihunting
> constituent groups typically do not support the practice. Controversy or lack of public
> support for baiting most often involves perceptions of fair chase and this fair chase challenge
> weakens public support not only for hunting programs, but also for wildlife conservation and
> management programs that have historically been accepted (Peyton 1998). Hunting is a tradition
> and an important tool with respect to deer management; however issues such as hunting deer
> over bait jeopardize the continued acceptance of hunting by an increasingly skeptical public at
> large (Williamson 2000).
> 
> Why can't people get their brains around this simple information?  Ultimately it will be the non-hunters who determine when and if we lose our right to hunt and this doesn't help us with them.



So you don't accept the conclusions of the study, but you like what they say about ethics?  Classic.


----------



## UYD4L

nickel back said:


> Hmmm,I have posted many times on baiting,I know for a fact that I have said corn is a habit changer and is going to do more harm than good for us hunters.



I know.  I'm with you.  But I think me and you are about the only ones.


----------



## CamoCop

i love hunting georgia, it's just not cost efficient for me at this date and time.  i hunt because i love to hunt, i don't need the meat for my family and i to survive (even though it helps cut some cost).  i don't hunt only for that BIG buck (even though it is nice to get one).  i started hunting georgia mainly for scenery change.  i got tired of looking across palmetto flats and swamps and rather look across hardwood bottoms and have a change in seasons.  due to the economy i am forced back to the palmetto flats and swamps but i will still hunt because i love hunting.  hunt because you LOVE too, not for any other reason!  if you wanna participate in a sport, take up golf and keep the "sport" out of hunting.  as long as people hunt legally, it should not bother another fellow hunter.


----------



## Jerk

I haven't read this entire thread, but I have input on both sides of this......I grew up in Georgia.  Deer hunted there from age six until I got out of college.  Then, married and moved here to NC where baiting is legal.

From the standpoint of enjoying hunting, the baiting makes it easier.  If you're in a good spot, and you can keep a bag of corn spread out (NOT IN PILES) on the ground for the 2 weeks before you go in and hunt, you WILL see and likely kill deer.  It is a bow hunter's dream.

I remember growing up in GA and getting all jacked up when we would see deer.  Mainly because we had to hunt public land and it didn't always happen.  2, 3, 4 trips in a row without seeing a legal deer.  Here in NC, call it cheating or whatever, but I see deer EVERY time I hunt.  I can be selective.  Because I feel like I have a good chance of seeing the same buck multiple times, and year after year, because I keep their interest with corn.

Some of you will love it.  Some will hate it on principle.  But for those of you who just enjoy hunting and seeing animals, this will be great for you. And needless to say, it's an awesome thing for getting children involved in hunting without being bored to death waiting and hoping on deer.  With corn, they're coming.  90 percent of the time, you will see them unless you've been a slob and contaminated your area.

Good luck next season GA guys.  Have fun!


----------



## Catdaddy SC

nickel back said:


> I maybe reading this wrong but,in this study it says that the best hunting is where baiting is not allowed in S.C.
> 
> now Im only going by what this says,I have never hunted S.C
> 
> http://www.wideerhunters.org/articles/SCbaitstudy.pdf





What Dr. Ruth's and Mr. Shipe's work doesn't point out is the difference in habitat(hardwoods vs pines,fields vs pasture), hunters per acres in both zones, and hunter attitudes.

I will tell you this, the best managed properties in SC are not in the upstate. My friends up there tell me that it's like a dove shoot from opening day on. Most hunt 75 acres or less and aren't very selective(or at least compared to the low country).

Most properties/clubs in the rest of the state average way more than 100 acres per hunter. They have alot longer season and don't feel the need to shoot everything. I just leased my 600 acres last year to a guy from NC. He took it under my strict management program for bowhunting only.....by himself.


This study does nothing to show which part has the better hunting......just which group is harvesting more.


I do agree with Dr. Ruth's other findings, that feeding alot of corn(meaning 24-7) will make a deer move less and becoming more nocturnaal.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Yeah but ya'll anti-baiters don't believe that study do you?  Ya'll think baiting works right:



And the pro-baiting crowd DOESN'T think baiting works??  You expect us to believe THAT??

Here is some other info from the study/report:

"Research concerning the effects of baiting on deer harvest have produced mixed results
and focused primarily on success of individual hunters. A 1999 Michigan phone survey of deer
hunters indicated that 44 percent were successful using bait while 52 Percent were successful
without bait (Michigan Department of Natural Resources 1999). Langenau (1985) found
Michigan hunters using bait were no more effective harvesting deer than those who did not use
bait, however, Winterstein (1992) indicated that Michigan hunters were 20 percent more
effective when they used bait. In Texas, Synatzke (1981) reported higher hunter success,
reduced kill distance, more deer observed, and less time to harvest deer when hunting over bait.
In any event, advocates of baiting often promote the practice as a way to increase deer harvests
to control burgeoning populations."

and another one:

"On one Coastal Plain area were food habits were studied, utilization of feed by deer was 100
percent during a 5-month sampling period and the feed composed 53 percent of the rumen
contents (Ruth and Simmons 1995)."

and another:

"The effects of feeding on physical condition in deer have been documented (Ozoga and
Verme 1982) and may impact the interaction between baiting, hunter effort, and harvest rates. In
the Coastal Plain of South Carolina, body weights of deer in 9 of 10 sex-age classes were
significantly greater on a property where feeding took place than on a nearby State Wildlife
Management Area were baiting or feeding did not occur (Ruth 1990). However, it required over
2 times more effort to harvest deer on the area where feeding took place 3.37 man-days/deer
harvested) than on the area with no baiting or direct feeding (1.61 man-days/deer harvested)
(Ruth 1990). We believe that as the availability of bait increases and ultimately moves towards
supplemental feeding, there can be increased physical condition of deer at the local level. As
deer condition increases, the selectivity of foraging should increase while the time spent foraging
should decrease. Both factors, increased selectivity of foraging and decreased time foraging,
Ruth and Shipes 6
should reduce deer movements. Any decrease in deer movements should be expected to
negatively impact hunter success and deer harvest rates because the animals are less available to
hunters.
Effects on movement and behavior
Baiting can change the natural movements, distribution, and behavior of deer. Increased
nocturnal behavior by deer related to bait has been noted in Texas (Synatzke 1981) and in
Mississippi (Darrow 1993). On one property in the Coastal Plain of South Carolina where
visitation to feeding sites was monitored, there was a 25 to 1 rate of visitation by deer during
night versus during legal hunting hours (C. Ruth, Unpublished data). This nocturnal movement
behavior may be related to increased selectivity of foraging and decreased time spent foraging
associated with increased physical condition caused by bait. In any event, when hunters depend
on bait to harvest deer, this type of nocturnal movement behavior around bait should be expected
to negatively impact hunter success and deer harvest rates."

I think it is a significant observation that deer spend less time foraging and are more likely to go nocturnal in the presence of bait.  Why would anyone want less deer movement and more nocturnal activity/less daytime activity?  The idea that my neighbor's baiting practices could cause the deer I'm trying to hunt (who roam both properties and others as well) to move less and move less in daylight in particular is disturbing to me.


----------



## CamoCop

Buckfever said:


> A bear or turkey may show up, but get caught shooting one over bait if the Bill makes it all the way through will cost someone a minimium of $1500 fine. Not saying you would, but we all know someone will try it. I'm so glad that this ammendment was put in there.



i'm not a turkey or bear hunter, just bringing up an observation that i see on TV.  all those hunting shows showing bear hunting in Canada using bait.  i guess those aren't "free range" bears coming to that bait.  they are confined to 1 area...that area is called Canada which has more wilderness than the entire USA.


----------



## Randy

UYD4L said:


> I know.  I'm with you.  But I think me and you are about the only ones.



I am with y'all.  I also think it will do more harm than good and is a habit changer.  I also know that as bad as it is for the resource, it works to kill animals if done right.


----------



## GA DAWG

What habits it break?


----------



## Randy

GA DAWG said:


> What habits it break?



It oes not break habits as much as it creates them.


----------



## GA DAWG

Randy said:


> It oes not break habits as much as it creates them.


Like what?


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> And the pro-baiting crowd DOESN'T think baiting works??  You expect us to believe THAT??
> 
> Here is some other info from the study/report:



I'm not really a pro-baiter.  Primarily, because as I have said before, I think about all its going to help you with is shooting a doe with your bow.  

I just find it extremely ironic and contradictory that you would say you don't believe the conclusions of a study and then start citing that study to support your conclusions.  

You've now cited it again.  Increasing the irony.  I don't mean to give you personally a hard time plenty of others have done the same thing.


----------



## huntfourfun

Randy said:


> Not only would I not bait but if it is ever legalized in this state, I will quit hunting all together.



http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?p=5871997#post5871997

Well....................

Just messing with you............you are certainly passionate about baiting......


----------



## BONE HEAD

rex upshaw said:


> 270, what are the bag limits and length of hunting season, for those states that allow hunting over bait? I imagine that the seasons are much shorter, with more conservative bag limits.



Rex, I don't know the exact dates but both FL & SC have longer seasons and more liberal bag limits than GA.

  I really don't think there is a correlation with the baiting issue.. but there may be.


----------



## nickel back

GA DAWG said:


> What habits it break?



does not break them.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> So you don't accept the conclusions of the study, but you like what they say about ethics?  Classic.



DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.  WHERE DID I SAY THAT I DON'T ACCEPT THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY?  I didn't say that I did or didn't accept the conclusions.  

You said anti-baiters like myself think baiting helps people kill deer.  I just asked if you expect me to believe that the pro-baiters don't also think it helps.  If the pro-baiting crowd didn't think it would help them kill more and/or bigger deer then they wouldn't be pushing for this law and spending massive amounts of money on corn and feeders.

BTW, Their conclusion was basically that baiting in the coastal plain of SC resulted in lower harvest rates and did nothing to keep the high population under control.  Reasons cited reduced hunter success were reduced deer activity, increased nocturnal behavior and HUNTER DEPENDENCE ON BAIT.

In other words, lazy so called hunters put out mass quantities of bait and then rely on it.  Deer get fatter (another conclusion) and don't have to move around to find food so they move less and move less in daylight.  The lazy hunters then kill fewer deer as do everyone else.  That is how I would summarize their conclusions.  Does that sound like something good to you?


----------



## easbell

Tell us uninformed ones.... how/where is the best place to put your feeder. Oak flat, pine thicket, open field/area, spread it on the ground, pile it up What is the "BEST" way IYO?


----------



## swampdaddy

*your sick?*

Why does it make you sick?






Skyjacker said:


> I'm in the southern zone.  Makes me sick.


----------



## emusmacker

I didn't grow up hunting over "bait" but I do plant foot plots for the soul reason of drawing deer to the area I'm hunting.

Rex, and Randy, I have a scenario I would like to have answered:

The person next to my land has an apple orchard, he sees a 10 point buck eating his apples, that same 10 pointer is crossing my land and going to his apple trees, if I go over and but apples from him and throw them out around my stand, what advantage do I have over him hunting that same buck under his apple trees?  Is that buck any less wary eating the same apples that I tossed out than when he's eating under the apple trees?

Please explain the advantage of the "bait" apples over the planted apples.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> I just find it extremely ironic and contradictory that you would say you don't believe the conclusions of a study and then start citing that study to support your conclusions.
> 
> You've now cited it again.  Increasing the irony.  I don't mean to give you personally a hard time plenty of others have done the same thing.



I want to know where I said I did or did not accept the conclusions?  Also, the conclusion that some here cited "hunting is best were there is no baiting" is not listed in the "conclusions" of the study.

Also, I think the most important thing in the whole report is what they said about attitudes of non-hunters toward killing over bait.  Those non-hunters will someday decide the fate of hunting and nothing else in the study really matters if we can't hunt anymore.

Don't worry about giving me a hard time, I can handle it and I'm not mad at ya'.  I like a good debate.


----------



## BONE HEAD

Randy said:


> This information is what has kept this from every reaching the floor before.  The current leader of the WRD would not allow this information this time.



Huh?


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> DON'T PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH.  WHERE DID I SAY THAT I DON'T ACCEPT THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY?



Hey I'm sorry if I've offended you.  Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your posts.  But there are a lot of people who want to argue it both ways (both pro's and anti's) and I was assuming you were one of them.  Here's what you said before which led me to believe you didn't accept the conclusions of the study:



HuntinDawg89 said:


> I don't understand your question.  Those who oppose baiting (primarily) clearly believe that baiting makes it easier.  The most fanatical PROPONENTS of baiting assert that it doesn't make it that much easier, which begs the question "then why is it so vital that you be legally able to "hunt" over bait?"
> 
> Nobody disputes the fact that those against baiting think it makes a difference.



To me, you were clearly stating that bait makes killing a deer easier, and that only fanatics would argue otherwise.  In order to believe that you would not be able accept the conclusions of the study. 

Because, and again, to me, the study clearly concludes that hunting over bait does not make hunting easier.  In fact, for all the reason you mentioned it reduces hunter success.  

Maybe I misunderstood you or you hadn't read the study and now you've changed your mind about whether bait makes hunting easier?


----------



## swampdaddy

Dude- that's a awesome idea!!!!!!!!!!!!







G Duck said:


> Maybe now I can have a use for the 55 gal drum full of live oak acorns that I rake up every year from the front yard


----------



## FlipKing

Did the season extension to martin luther king jr day get taken out of the bill? Wasnt that being proposed at somepoint? I saw just as many deer in Ga as I did in North Carolina over bait.....


----------



## Paymaster

Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.


----------



## Randy

Paymaster said:


> Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.



lol.  I am too depressed to attend.


----------



## JBowers

FlipKing said:


> Did the season extension to martin luther king jr day get taken out of the bill?


 
That was removed from the bill.


----------



## BONE HEAD

HuntinDawg89;58721  Those non-hunters will someday decide the fate of hunting and nothing else in the study really matters if we can't hunt anymore.[/QUOTE said:
			
		

> First of all I do not accept your premise that non-hunters will decide the fate of hunting...several states including Ga have passed constitutional amendments protecting the RIGHT of the individual to hunt. I have too much confidence in my fellow hunters to accept that defeatist attitude.
> 
> Secondly,  if you really believe what you say then you should be Baiting's strongest ally.
> 
> You should defend with a vengeance your fellow hunters right to hunt as they themselves have deemed appropriate for it is through apathy and incremental-ism the we lose our rights.


----------



## shakey gizzard

Paymaster said:


> Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.



Whatcha cookin?


----------



## georgiabow

Paymaster said:


> Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.



any sort of advantage at all over the deer takes away the FAIR chase aspect. deer dont carry guns or bows around the woods, therefore it is not FAIR chase for you to do so. go hunting and take nothing but your bare hands, and learn to run down and strangle a deer if your so big on FAIR chase


----------



## Randy

BONE HEAD said:


> Huh?


I said:

This information is what has kept this from every reaching the floor before. The current leader of the WRD would not allow this information this time.


----------



## G Duck

swampdaddy said:


> Dude- that's a awesome idea!!!!!!!!!!!!



Im serious, I have a 200 plus year old live oak in the yard, and it is unreal the amount of acorns it drops. I just need me one of those blowers that has suction, and vacuum them up.

One thing that is a question for me, is that it specifically calls out "Corn" does that mean the Cmere deer is legal now?


----------



## Randy

huntfourfun said:


> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?p=5871997#post5871997
> 
> Well....................
> 
> Just messing with you............you are certainly passionate about baiting......



I still hold to it.  Though I have to change my statement a little:

If baiting is legalized in my part of the state I will quit hunting.  When I originally made the satement I had no idea the legislature would divide hunters like the have.


----------



## shakey gizzard

georgiabow said:


> any sort of advantage at all over the deer takes away the FAIR chase aspect. deer dont carry guns or bows around the woods, therefore it is not FAIR chase for you to do so. go hunting and take nothing but your bare hands, and learn to run down and strangle a deer if your so big on FAIR chase


Spoken like a true killer


----------



## BONE HEAD

Randy,

What information?  What Leader? How did he conceal this information?  Why did he conceal this information?

 Sorry if I missed something ...but please do elaborate.


----------



## georgiabow

shakey gizzard said:


> Spoken like a true killer


----------



## UYD4L

GA DAWG said:


> Like what?



Deer are natural browsers.  Generally, if they have a preferred localized food source (feed/bait) they are less active/mobile because they don't have to go around grazing/foraging for food.


----------



## BONE HEAD

Randy said:


> I still hold to it.  Though I have to change my statement a little:
> 
> If baiting is legalized in my part of the state I will quit hunting.  When I originally made the satement I had no idea the legislature would divide hunters like the have.



Its not the legislature that is doing the dividing.


----------



## CamoCop

Paymaster said:


> Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.



fair chase ended when the Europeans settled America.  news flash, hunting over bait is not going to change anything.  people were doing it last year in georgia and all the previous years.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Hey I'm sorry if I've offended you.  Maybe I'm just misinterpreting your posts.  But there are a lot of people who want to argue it both ways (both pro's and anti's) and I was assuming you were one of them.  Here's what you said before which led me to believe you didn't accept the conclusions of the study:
> 
> 
> 
> To me, you were clearly stating that bait makes killing a deer easier, and that only fanatics would argue otherwise.  In order to believe that you would not be able accept the conclusions of the study.
> 
> Because, and again, to me, the study clearly concludes that hunting over bait does not make hunting easier.  In fact, for all the reason you mentioned it reduces hunter success.
> 
> Maybe I misunderstood you or you hadn't read the study and now you've changed your mind about whether bait makes hunting easier?



1) When I wrote what you first quoted I had not read the study and I was responding to a nonsensical statement by a pro-baiter...as if they would champion legalizing baiting if they didn't think it helped them kill deer.

2) In the study they disclosed that some other studies had shown that baiting did increase hunter success.

3) The lower hunter success in the areas where baiting is allowed relative to the areas where baiting is not allowed was not the conclusion of the study, but rather part of the data in the study.  I have no reason to doubt the validity of their data.  Drawing accurate conclusions is tricky because it isn't taking place in a vacuum.  What are the relative deer densities in the baited / non-baited areas?  What were the hunter success rates in that area before baiting was allowed (if applicable, maybe it has always been allowed)?  Does the ability to legally kill over bait result in more "hunters" who are too lazy to get out and scout and try to understand the deer movement patterns on their land?

4) The conclusion of the study was not that the hunting was better where baiting was not legal or even that baiting made a hunter less likely to kill a deer.  One of the conclusions was that baiting didn't help control an increasing population because deer went nocturnal, traveled less in search of food and hunters depended on the bait.  None of those conclusions make me want to favor baiting more than I did before I read the study (I didn't support it and I still don't).

5) I still believe that baiting will help A hunter kill A deer or SOME deer.  The pro-baiters must believe this too or they wouldn't be so fired up about getting it legalized and spending their money on bait and feeders, so when a pro-baiter says it doesn't help much, yes that rings very hollow to me.  However, the implication of the study is that widespread hunting over bait changes the behavior of the deer and may ultimately result in lower success for everyone within the area, which really sucks.

6) My reasons for opposing the legalization of baiting are as follows:  A) I think it is unethical; B) I think (if legalized in the NZ where I hunt) that it will affect the way deer move and will affect my success whether I bait or not; C) I think once baiting is accepted in the SZ it will be legalized in the NZ sooner or later; D) I think it makes it that much easier for the anti-hunters to demonize us in a way that makes sense and rings true to non-hunters who will ultimately determine whether we continue to hunt or not.

7) I still think that baiting will increase hunter success SHORT TERM, but that is not really my concern and won't affect me in the NZ.  Anybody in the SZ who had never been able to kill a deer, this is their opportunity before the deer react by going nocturnal and moving less in general.


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> and many people from florida come to georgia to hunt, because the hunting is better.  you don't see many people from georgia heading to florida.  sure, genetics and age structure play a role, but if you are able to kill 2 bucks a day, it stands to reason that your hunting is not going to be that great.


LOL Rex if you kill 2 bucks a day here you will become my hero. LOL I hunted here near the house and over corn and only saw 2 does  no bucks one died on doe week. we only killed like 4 bucks total between 12 members plus kids...... Our club has no plots or oak hammocks of any kind to hunt only pines so thick you can't walk in them and a new huge clear cut.


----------



## GA DAWG

UYD4L said:


> Deer are natural browsers.  Generally, if they have a preferred localized food source (feed/bait) they are less active/mobile because they don't have to go around grazing/foraging for food.


So the keeping feeders full 200 yards out of site didnt do that and now because somebody can hunt over it does?


----------



## Randy

emusmacker said:


> I didn't grow up hunting over "bait" but I do plant foot plots for the soul reason of drawing deer to the area I'm hunting.
> 
> Rex, and Randy, I have a scenario I would like to have answered:
> 
> The person next to my land has an apple orchard, he sees a 10 point buck eating his apples, that same 10 pointer is crossing my land and going to his apple trees, if I go over and but apples from him and throw them out around my stand, what advantage do I have over him hunting that same buck under his apple trees?  Is that buck any less wary eating the same apples that I tossed out than when he's eating under the apple trees?
> 
> Please explain the advantage of the "bait" apples over the planted apples.



Great example.  Probably he will not see that buck eating his apples after season comes in unless he is there during the night because that wise old buck will feel the pressure and only visit those growing apples during the night.  Now if you just pour yours out and leave them there all the time you probably won't see him either unless you are there at night.

However once all his apples are gone and the buck is left with nothing growing on the tree to eat at night and you only put your apples out during the daylight hours that buck will have to visit that food during the daylight to get something to eat and there is your advantage.  Works even better with corn.  If you have ever used a feeder before you know it makes a terrible racket when it goes off.  A diner bell so to speak.  Set it for 1/2 hour after daylight and they get in the habit of visiting it then.  They know that the corn will not last long on the ground and they have to get there right after the diner bell in order to get some.  In fact, animals become so habitualized if you do it right and long enough that you can even know when it is close to going off.  I can asure you that about 15 minutes before it goes off that birds will start congregating and waiting on it to go off.  Yes it is that simple and yes it works just like that.  Yes I know it does I have seen it.  I have heard pigs just off in the bush waiting till the feeder went off.  The can be traiined to come to the sound of the feeder.

Same thing happens out in Texas.  The Rancher drives you out to your stand, dumps corn on the ground and leaves.  The deer/animlas hear his truck leave and know that corn is on the ground.  He trains them that way.  Just like a farmer who feeds his cows.  When they hear that truck or tractor coming the come running in for feed.  Simple really.

In fact, I suggest you feed from your 4 wheeler.  just drive in to your stand drop off the corn drive your 4 wheeler off adn go back and get in your stand.  Do that enough and your deer will be trained.  Now why does this not normally work.  I take time to condition these animals to this butonce they are it is simple!


----------



## JBowers

BONE HEAD said:


> several states including Ga have passed constitutional amendments protecting the RIGHT of the individual to hunt.


 
No offense, but I believe that too many hunters give this constitutional "right" language far too much credit and do not really understand what that "right" says?

Here it is:

"The tradition of fishing and hunting and the taking of fish and wildlife shall be preserved for the people *and shall be managed by law and regulation* for the public good"

That underline and bolded part means it is not a "right" in the sense that we consider the "rights" of the Bill of Rights.  It does not state anywhere that any law-making authority is prohibited from promulgating any law or regulation that may infringe upon this "right."

It is only a "right" as subject to the state game & fish laws and the hunting rules and regulations.  That is, every time a law, rule or regulation is amended, stricken, or otherwise modified, our "rights" have changed and either been expanded or decreased.  It's pretty easy to change a law, rule or regulation, so exactly where is the prophylactic against an assault by the anti's or any group who wants to impact hunting?  All they hvae to simply do is to change state law or regulation to affect this "right."

As Georgia becomes more urban so will our legislature and with that change will follow a change in the view of and how hunting and hunters are valued.

Hope this helps some folks better understand!


----------



## Randy

BONE HEAD said:


> Its not the legislature that is doing the dividing.


Sure it is they make the laws.


----------



## BigBuckDown08

*Who cares!!!!*

Who cares about the baiting laws if thats the only way you can successfully harvest deer then go for it. I never have nor will I ever put out bait to kill a deer I do my homework and a have a very good success rate! So lets get on with life fellas and ladies.


----------



## BONE HEAD

JBowers said:


> No offense, but I believe that too many hunters give this constitutional "right" language far too much credit and do not really understand what that "right" says?
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> "The tradition of fishing and hunting and the taking of fish and wildlife shall be preserved for the people *and shall be managed by law and regulation* for the public good"
> 
> That underline and bolded part means it is not a "right" in the sense that we consider the "rights" of the Bill of Rights.  It does not state anywhere that any law-making authority is prohibited from promulgating any law or regulation that may infringe upon this "right."
> 
> It is only a "right" as subject to the state game & fish laws and the hunting rules and regulations.  That is, every time a law, rule or regulation is amended, stricken, or otherwise modified, our "rights" have changed and either been expanded or decreased.  It's pretty easy to change a law, rule or regulation, so exactly where is the prophylactic against an assault by the anti's or any group who wants to impact hunting?  All they hvae to simply do is to change state law or regulation to affect this "right."
> 
> As Georgia becomes more urban so will our legislature and with that change will follow a change in the view of and how hunting and hunters are valued.
> 
> Hope this helps some folks better understand!



   Thats right...glad you posted that.


----------



## 270 guy

huntfourfun said:


> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?p=5871997#post5871997
> 
> Well....................
> 
> Just messing with you............you are certainly passionate about baiting......


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> 1) When I wrote what you first quoted I had not read the study and I was responding to a nonsensical statement by a pro-baiter...as if they would champion legalizing baiting if they didn't think it helped them kill deer.
> 
> 7) I still think that baiting will increase hunter success SHORT TERM, but that is not really my concern and won't affect me in the NZ.  Anybody in the SZ who had never been able to kill a deer, this is their opportunity before the deer react by going nocturnal and moving less in general.



Well, I wasn't wrong.  You do want to argue it both ways.

Here's an a couple lines straight from the conclusion:

"Proponents of baiting often claim that baiting decreases hunter effort and increases deer harvest rates that will solve problems associated with abundant deer populations. Though counterintuitive for some observers, data from this study suggest a negative, rather than a positive, relationship between baiting and deer harvest rates and hunter effort at the regional level in South Carolina."

You can rationalize your point of view and the info in the study all you want.  But ultimately, you either agree with the conclusion of the study which is that baiting doesn't make hunting easier or you don't.  

I think it is interesting that you separated it into long run and short run though.  Thats pretty creative.  I haven't seen that before.  And I could see your logic there.  But there is no info on that conclusion. And I don't think it takes very long for the results of the study to take effect.


----------



## FlipKing

If passed, will the law go into effect for this coming season?


----------



## Ckersey33

*Question*

So what happens if someone is hunting over a pile of corn in the northern zone, then gets approached by the game warden during deer season? 

It looks like it is legal to hunt hogs over corn year round in the northern zone...couldn't a dishonest individual just tell the game warden he is hunting hogs and not deer?

Am I missing something?


----------



## BONE HEAD

Randy said:


> Sure it is they make the laws.



You can not be serious....really?

  Very illustrative.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

BONE HEAD said:


> First of all I do not accept your premise that non-hunters will decide the fate of hunting...several states including Ga have passed constitutional amendments protecting the RIGHT of the individual to hunt. I have too much confidence in my fellow hunters to accept that defeatist attitude.



I wish I could believe otherwise, but it is a fact that the percentage of the population that does not hunt (and therefore the percentage of voters that do not hunt) is growing.  Whether by direct vote at the ballot box or by electing officials who know that their constituents are not hunters, these people will affect our right to hunt at some point and possibly determine it directly (in the case of ballot initiatives) simply because they are the largest part of the population and growing.

The constitutional amendment in Georgia was a great thing, but it can be undone.  Let the uproar against hunting rise far enough or the support for it dwindle far enough and we will lose the right.  The amendment certainly pushed that timeline farther out though and for that I am thankful.  I don't think we will lose the right to hunt in Georgia in my lifetime (another 30-50 years if I'm lucky, far less than that in my hunting lifetime) but in my kids or grandkids lifetimes...a definite possibility.



BONE HEAD said:


> Secondly,  if you really believe what you say then you should be Baiting's strongest ally.
> 
> You should defend with a vengeance your fellow hunters right to hunt as they themselves have deemed appropriate for it is through apathy and incremental-ism the we lose our rights.



That is a tricky thing.  I would agree with you on an issue such as hunting deer with dogs (although I've never done it) because that is an existing legal and traditional form of hunting in some areas of Georgia and there are people who would likely give up hunting if they could no longer use their dogs (I can sympathize as I would not duck hunt without my dog).  Currently shooting deer over bait is NOT legal, so why would anyone quit hunting if it is not MADE legal?  Also, I seriously doubt that anyone will take up hunting simply because baiting is now legal.  Also, the implications of the study in SC indicate that the hunting conditions in the overall area where baiting is legal may suffer (fatter deer who move less in general and less in daylight??) so no, I'll not be changing my mind.

Your point is about standing together and incremental-ism is valid if talking about something like hunting deer with dogs or allowing crossbows during archery season or scopes on muzzleloaders.  I personally do not think that crossbows have a place in archery season because they are too much like a gun and require far less skill than killing a deer with a bow, but it brought people into the sport and it doesn't really impact me (unlike widespread baiting could as previously noted)
so I keep my mouth shut about it except here for illustrational purposes.

When something adversely affects the overall deer herd or the overall hunting experience or jeopardizes (in my opinion) our future by eroding public support for hunting then I'm not going to support it.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

Ckersey33 said:


> So what happens if someone is hunting over a pile of corn in the northern zone, then gets approached by the game warden during deer season?
> 
> It looks like it is legal to hunt hogs over corn year round in the northern zone...couldn't a dishonest individual just tell the game warden he is hunting hogs and not deer?
> 
> Am I missing something?



None of us know exactly what the bill will say in its final form once passed, but I don't think you are missing anything.  At best I think game wardens in the NZ are going to have a harder time enforcing the law against hunting deer over bait and at worst it will be like they have turned a blind eye to it - just like our bogus no tagging system means there is effectively no limit on deer (or bucks) in Georgia.


----------



## JBowers

UYD4L said:


> But ultimately, you either agree with the conclusion of the study which is that baiting doesn't make hunting easier or you don't.


 
I don't believe the study makes any conclusion(s) whatsoever on the ease of hunting.

I am of the belief that hunting is process and not a finite result.  And, baiting may or may not affect that process.  Whether it does and to what magnitude is determined by the participant.


----------



## UYD4L

GA DAWG said:


> So the keeping feeders full 200 yards out of site didnt do that and now because somebody can hunt over it does?



You need to re-read the posts.  The question you asked was how is corn a habit changer not how is legalizing hunting over bait a habit changer.  And I said feed/bait in my answer.


----------



## UYD4L

JBowers said:


> I don't believe the study makes any conclusion(s) whatsoever on the ease of hunting.
> 
> I am of the belief that hunting is process and not a finite result.  And, baiting may or may not affect that process.  Whether it does and to what magnitude is determined by the participant.



What do you think the study was referring to when it said "hunter effort"?  Please explain the portion of the conclusion that I quoted.  You're beliefs and the conclusions of the study might be two different things.


----------



## biker13

Will truck buck now be a truck for the Southern zone and one for the Northern zone? Corn buck vs acorn buck? Its a mess for sure.


----------



## georgiabow

Ckersey33 said:


> It looks like it is legal to hunt hogs over corn year round in the northern zone...couldn't a dishonest individual just tell the game warden he is hunting hogs and not deer?



yep.


----------



## elfiii

HuntinDawg89 said:


> I wish I could believe otherwise, but it is a fact that the percentage of the population that does not hunt (and therefore the percentage of voters that do not hunt) is growing.  Whether by direct vote at the ballot box or by electing officials who know that their constituents are not hunters, these people will affect our right to hunt at some point and possibly determine it directly (in the case of ballot initiatives) simply because they are the largest part of the population and growing.
> 
> The constitutional amendment in Georgia was a great thing, but it can be undone.  Let the uproar against hunting rise far enough or the support for it dwindle far enough and we will lose the right.  The amendment certainly pushed that timeline farther out though and for that I am thankful.  I don't think we will lose the right to hunt in Georgia in my lifetime (another 30-50 years if I'm lucky, far less than that in my hunting lifetime) but in my kids or grandkids lifetimes...a definite possibility.



Based on the "lopsidedness" of the vote last night I doubt we have much to worry about on that score for a long, long time in this state.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> I still hold to it.  Though I have to change my statement a little:
> 
> If baiting is legalized in my part of the state I will quit hunting.  When I originally made the satement I had no idea the legislature would divide hunters like the have.



How many times are you going to change it up? First you said the state then you said you would still hunt but call yourself a shooter .......now you say the whole state. Give up your digging a deeper hole each time. If you don't want to bait don't it's not that hard to understand. I have killed my biggest bucks in states that have baiting and they weren't killed anywhere near bait.


----------



## 243Savage

dlsbiker13 said:


> Will truck buck now be a truck for the Southern zone and one for the Northern zone? Corn buck vs acorn buck? Its a mess for sure.



The southern zone truck will run only on ethanol.


----------



## bm708

Ckersey33 said:


> So what happens if someone is hunting over a pile of corn in the northern zone, then gets approached by the game warden during deer season?
> 
> It looks like it is legal to hunt hogs over corn year round in the northern zone...couldn't a dishonest individual just tell the game warden he is hunting hogs and not deer?
> 
> Am I missing something?



But we all know there are no dishonest hunters on here.


----------



## T/C 300 MAG

My southern zone lease just went up to $20 an acre.


----------



## kmckinnie

243Savage said:


> The southern zone truck will run only on ethanol.


----------



## JBowers

UYD4L said:


> What do you think the study was referring to when it said "hunter effort"? Please explain the portion of the conclusion that I quoted. You're beliefs and the conclusions of the study might be two different things.


 
Hunter Effort would be defined as the measure of time required to kill a deer.  That time is time spent in the stand.  For example, it took me 15 minutes to kill that deer.  If that is the only deer I killed then my effort was 15 minutes per deer.  What the study was getting at was whether deer were more efficiently killed with bait.  The result was for the time period and area investigated that baiting did not increase kill efficiency.  At best, I believe that one could conclude from that study that baiting does not make killing deer easier.

Like I shared, hunting is a process and not a finite result.  It includes activities (exercies, scouting, habitat management, etc)beyond the scope of sitting in a blind, stand, on the ground, etc.  For some, that process is a life-long endeavor.


----------



## bobcat

Looks like all the hunters who wanted to bait are fixing to possibly get it .There gonna really get it when timber companies go up about 10 dollars an acre and all the southern counties that have plantations start leasing all the dirt for guided hunts !!Its coming so get ready for it ! i know of 3 plantations thats gonna get a bunch of land when it passes .!!!!!! Guess wmas will get really crowded huh


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Well, I wasn't wrong.  You do want to argue it both ways.
> 
> Here's an a couple lines straight from the conclusion:
> 
> "Proponents of baiting often claim that baiting decreases hunter effort and increases deer harvest rates that will solve problems associated with abundant deer populations. Though counterintuitive for some observers, data from this study suggest a negative, rather than a positive, relationship between baiting and deer harvest rates and hunter effort at the regional level in South Carolina."
> 
> You can rationalize your point of view and the info in the study all you want.  But ultimately, you either agree with the conclusion of the study which is that baiting doesn't make hunting easier or you don't.
> 
> I think it is interesting that you separated it into long run and short run though.  Thats pretty creative.  I haven't seen that before.  And I could see your logic there.  But there is no info on that conclusion. And I don't think it takes very long for the results of the study to take effect.



1) They were very careful to repeatedly state that their conclusion applied to the coastal plain of SC.  There are potentially many other factors at work.

2) They cited other studies that indicated that hunter success was elevated with baiting.  Why should we ignore those studies and not this one?

3) You and I disagree about the main conclusion of the study.  I don't think the main conclusion of the study was that baiting made killing deer in the coastal plain of SC easier or harder.  For one thing you'd need to know what the success rate was before baiting, but it sounds like baiting is a long time practice there, possibly one that has never been controlled by their state wildlife department.  The important conclusions to me were that it didn't stop the population growth (possibly because fertility and fawn survival rates increase in the presence of greater food supply) and most importantly to me that the deer behavior changed in a way that was not beneficial, the deer traveled less in search of food and became more nocturnal.  If you are hunting in an area like that you are going to suffer from it regardless of whether you hunt over bait or not IMO.  The baiting there appears to have been detrimental (again, no historical data) to the hunting experience (less movement, more nocturnal).

4) I tried to draw a distinction that you either didn't catch or simply didn't want to acknowledge.  One question could be "if you put out bait will it make it easier for you to kill a deer" and I think the answer to that is obviously yes.  Another question would be "does legalized and widespread baiting result in overall higher or lower hunter success rates" and that answer, in the coastal plain of SC at the time of the study seems to be "lower" but again with no historical data (I think it has been going on there for a looong time, possibly never regulated).

5) I don't think I was being creative with the long term vs. short term thing at all.  Based on my own logic plus the info from that study, I would expect that legalized hunting over bait will be at it's highest success rate when it first goes in to practice.  If you take a large piece of property where deer have never been hunted over bait and start hunting them over bait there this season, I expect that hunter success there will increase dramatically.  At some point I would expect it to level off and eventually very possibly to decrease as it may have done (no historical data) in the coastal plain of SC due to less deer movement for food and more nocturnal behavior.  How fast will the success rate go up and then back down?  I think it will go up sharply at first (not if you've already been baiting there illegally) and then level off and go back down below the previous success rate without bait very possibly, but I don't know how long the leveling off and later decrease would take.  I suspect that the response to baiting would be down from the beginning of the season to the end but deer activity usually decreases after the rut anyway and there are fewer deer left in the woods at that point anyway.  If there were a study on hunter success in the SZ starting last season (to give us historical data) I would expect hunter success this year (year 1 of legal baiting) to be at the peak and then lower in year 2 but probably still higher than year 0 (last year) and then after 2 or 3 years of baiting it might be like SC appears to have been and be down and stay there as long as there is legalized widespread baiting.  My assumption there would only be valid if there is a widespread acceptance of the new legalized baiting throughout the study area basically from day one, which is possible.  Maybe I'm wrong and it would all happen faster, but I don't think that there is any doubt that it will work at first (if you haven't already conditioned your deer this way with illegal hunting over bait in years past).

5) Btw, the study did not gather data on the success rate of those who hunted over bait in the coastal plain vs. those who did not in the coastal plain, only on hunters in the coastal plain - where baiting is legal vs. hunters in the piedmont where baiting is illegal and that is a key difference.  This would address the question of whether it is easier for an individual hunter to have success by baiting or not.  There study was more focused on whether it was a good way (baiting) to hold back the growth of their "burgeoning" population.


----------



## G Duck

bobcat said:


> Looks like all the hunters who wanted to bait are fixing to possibly get it .There gonna really get it when timber companies go up about 10 dollars an acre and all the southern counties that have plantations start leasing all the dirt for guided hunts !!Its coming so get ready for it ! i know of 3 plantations thats gonna get a bunch of land when it passes .!!!!!! Guess wmas will get really crowded huh



Wont happen here. Maybe in the land of the tame quail.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

elfiii said:


> Based on the "lopsidedness" of the vote last night I doubt we have much to worry about on that score for a long, long time in this state.



I don't think it will be seriously threatened for a good 20-30 years, but if we have rapid population growth (meaning population growth of people, not deer) you never know.  Right now the legislative trends in Georgia and in the US in general are favoring hunting and gun ownership/gun rights, so that is a good thing.


----------



## 7Mag Hunter

fishtail said:


> Well, now that it has passed, you got something more to think about.
> 
> The Bill stipulates for Deer and Hog.
> Now you got a feeder or bait in the vicinity of other game animals that are also gonna be attracted.
> You now have the pleasure to defend yourself that you wasn't hunting Turkeys, Dove, Quail, Ducks, etc.
> Someone correct me if I'm wrong.



Northern Zone you can bait for hogs only.....What if a
GW comes into your area and finds corn and gives you
a ticket for hunting "DEER" over bait....And you were HOG
hunting ?????????

Hunt club managers are gonna have to sort out 1st come
hunt areas over bait piles now....

A real mess....


----------



## Jeff Phillips

It passed the House, still has a ways to go...


----------



## HuntinDawg89

HuntinDawg89 said:


> 1) When I wrote what you first quoted I had not read the study and I was responding to a nonsensical statement by a pro-baiter...as if they would champion legalizing baiting if they didn't think it helped them kill deer.
> 
> 7) I still think that baiting will increase hunter success SHORT TERM, but that is not really my concern and won't affect me in the NZ.  Anybody in the SZ who had never been able to kill a deer, this is their opportunity before the deer react by going nocturnal and moving less in general.





UYD4L said:


> Well, I wasn't wrong.  You do want to argue it both ways.
> 
> Here's an a couple lines straight from the conclusion:
> 
> "Proponents of baiting often claim that baiting decreases hunter effort and increases deer harvest rates that will solve problems associated with abundant deer populations. Though counterintuitive for some observers, data from this study suggest a negative, rather than a positive, relationship between baiting and deer harvest rates and hunter effort at the regional level in South Carolina."
> 
> You can rationalize your point of view and the info in the study all you want.  But ultimately, you either agree with the conclusion of the study which is that baiting doesn't make hunting easier or you don't.
> 
> I think it is interesting that you separated it into long run and short run though.  Thats pretty creative.  I haven't seen that before.  And I could see your logic there.  But there is no info on that conclusion. And I don't think it takes very long for the results of the study to take effect.



I don't understand why you chose the two quotes of mine above as evidence that I want to "argue it both ways."  Do you dispute that the pro-baiters think it will allow them to kill more deer?  There is perception and reality and they perceive that it will therefore they are excited it about it.  They think it will allow them to kill more and/or bigger deer with less effort.  Some of them think this because that has been true for them in the past when they were baiting illegally.  I think that one of the things to be learned from the study is that once the baiting becomes more widespread the deer will adjust over time in ways that the pro-baiters have not anticipated.

The pro-baiters are in favor because they think it will help them kill more and/or bigger deer with less effort (sure some just want to sell more feeders or corn, but generally..).  This is true (their motivations) whether 10,000 studies say it won't happen or not.


----------



## DAVE

I believe most of you anti-baiters are really nothing more than anti-hunter activist but lack the convictions to proclaim it or the intelligence to reconize it. Just as likely is that you anti-baiters are really just putting up a front because, you don't want the neighbors baiting, because it may draw deer away from the bait station you been using for years.


----------



## 270 guy

bobcat said:


> Looks like all the hunters who wanted to bait are fixing to possibly get it .There gonna really get it when timber companies go up about 10 dollars an acre and all the southern counties that have plantations start leasing all the dirt for guided hunts !!Its coming so get ready for it ! i know of 3 plantations thats gonna get a bunch of land when it passes .!!!!!! Guess wmas will get really crowded huh



They can go up but if hunters don't pay it they can't get it. Talk to rayonier about that LOL. They now have signs on trees trying to get folks to lease there land after they tried that. People will only pay so much demand sets the price not corn on the ground. There has been corn on the ground for years now.


----------



## UYD4L

JBowers said:


> Hunter Effort would be defined as the measure of time required to kill a deer.  That time is time spent in the stand.  For example, it took me 15 minutes to kill that deer.  If that is the only deer I killed then my effort was 15 minutes per deer.  What the study was getting at was whether deer were more efficiently killed with bait.  The result was for the time period and area investigated that baiting did not increase kill efficiency.  At best, I believe that one could conclude from that study that baiting does not make killing deer easier.
> 
> Like I shared, hunting is a process and not a finite result.  It includes activities (exercies, scouting, habitat management, etc)beyond the scope of sitting in a blind, stand, on the ground, etc.  For some, that process is a life-long endeavor.



I think the study says that pretty much in black and white in the portion I quoted before.

I'm not arguing with you about your beliefs or that there aren't many activities involved in hunting.  

I'll I've ever mentioned is what the study itself concluded, and again you can rationalize or discount that conclusion all you want but its pretty clear what they concluded.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

HuntinDawg89 said:


> 1) They were very careful to repeatedly state that their conclusion applied to the coastal plain of SC.  There are potentially many other factors at work.
> 
> 2) They cited other studies that indicated that hunter success was elevated with baiting.  Why should we ignore those studies and not this one?
> 
> 3) You and I disagree about the main conclusion of the study.  I don't think the main conclusion of the study was that baiting made killing deer in the coastal plain of SC easier or harder.  For one thing you'd need to know what the success rate was before baiting, but it sounds like baiting is a long time practice there, possibly one that has never been controlled by their state wildlife department.  The important conclusions to me were that it didn't stop the population growth (possibly because fertility and fawn survival rates increase in the presence of greater food supply) and most importantly to me that the deer behavior changed in a way that was not beneficial, the deer traveled less in search of food and became more nocturnal.  If you are hunting in an area like that you are going to suffer from it regardless of whether you hunt over bait or not IMO.  The baiting there appears to have been detrimental (again, no historical data) to the hunting experience (less movement, more nocturnal).
> 
> 4) I tried to draw a distinction that you either didn't catch or simply didn't want to acknowledge.  One question could be "if you put out bait will it make it easier for you to kill a deer" and I think the answer to that is obviously yes.  Another question would be "does legalized and widespread baiting result in overall higher or lower hunter success rates" and that answer, in the coastal plain of SC at the time of the study seems to be "lower" but again with no historical data (I think it has been going on there for a looong time, possibly never regulated).
> 
> 5) I don't think I was being creative with the long term vs. short term thing at all.  Based on my own logic plus the info from that study, I would expect that legalized hunting over bait will be at it's highest success rate when it first goes in to practice.  If you take a large piece of property where deer have never been hunted over bait and start hunting them over bait there this season, I expect that hunter success there will increase dramatically.  At some point I would expect it to level off and eventually very possibly to decrease as it may have done (no historical data) in the coastal plain of SC due to less deer movement for food and more nocturnal behavior.  How fast will the success rate go up and then back down?  I think it will go up sharply at first (not if you've already been baiting there illegally) and then level off and go back down below the previous success rate without bait very possibly, but I don't know how long the leveling off and later decrease would take.  I suspect that the response to baiting would be down from the beginning of the season to the end but deer activity usually decreases after the rut anyway and there are fewer deer left in the woods at that point anyway.  If there were a study on hunter success in the SZ starting last season (to give us historical data) I would expect hunter success this year (year 1 of legal baiting) to be at the peak and then lower in year 2 but probably still higher than year 0 (last year) and then after 2 or 3 years of baiting it might be like SC appears to have been and be down and stay there as long as there is legalized widespread baiting.  My assumption there would only be valid if there is a widespread acceptance of the new legalized baiting throughout the study area basically from day one, which is possible.  Maybe I'm wrong and it would all happen faster, but I don't think that there is any doubt that it will work at first (if you haven't already conditioned your deer this way with illegal hunting over bait in years past).
> 
> 5) Btw, the study did not gather data on the success rate of those who hunted over bait in the coastal plain vs. those who did not in the coastal plain, only on hunters in the coastal plain - where baiting is legal vs. hunters in the piedmont where baiting is illegal and that is a key difference.  This would address the question of whether it is easier for an individual hunter to have success by baiting or not.  There study was more focused on whether it was a good way (baiting) to hold back the growth of their "burgeoning" population.




Good post HD.

Dr. Ruth simply posted statistics from both areas which TENDS to lead one to a conclusion. He is a very smart man.

The one that jumps out and makes you think is the deer/auto collisions being less in the low country. What it points out is deer move further where there is no baiting.....exposing them to highways......or maybe they have move roads and traffic. I don't know the answer to the latter, but he put it there to suggest a correlation.


Here's why I don't draw a conclusion from the report. This is representative on what I see on alot of hunts. On this property(600 acres), I haven't shot a deer(buck or doe in 2 years) and hunt it by myself. Most of my friends see the same where they hunt.....so I think hunters are more selective in my area than the rest of the state.........but that's speculation.


----------



## 19694x4

*Who can afford corn???*

Have you checked the price on a 50 lb bag of corn lately? You might as well use Swamp Donkey or Deer Cocaine or some of that other junk. Come on now all of you use some kind of attractant, be it ediable or nose candy for the deer. At least now all the hunters from North and south of the state line can do what they have been doing just now it will be LEGAL!!!


----------



## GA DAWG

If baiting was legal last year..This un would be dead..


----------



## chrisr116

I am from SC, living in Georgia for 9 years now.  Where I lived and grew up, hunting over corn has always been legal.  I have shot plenty of deer off the corn pile, legally.  Now for my observation- once you pull the trigger once or twice on that corn pile, the deer will just avoid it and go noctournal.  Just the same as hunting over a food plot.  Pressure a food plot or corn pile, and the result will be the same.  I really think folks will see that it is not that big of a deal.  I haven't heard of any CWD issues in SC, but maybe am just unaware of it.  If you use restraint, it is a great tool, just like food plots (in my opinion).  It is natural for people to resist change, but I believe it will be a non-issue within a short time..assuming, it is signed into law.


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> 1) They were very careful to repeatedly state that their conclusion applied to the coastal plain of SC.  There are potentially many other factors at work.
> 
> 2) They cited other studies that indicated that hunter success was elevated with baiting.  Why should we ignore those studies and not this one?
> 
> 3) You and I disagree about the main conclusion of the study.  I don't think the main conclusion of the study was that baiting made killing deer in the coastal plain of SC easier or harder.  For one thing you'd need to know what the success rate was before baiting, but it sounds like baiting is a long time practice there, possibly one that has never been controlled by their state wildlife department.  The important conclusions to me were that it didn't stop the population growth (possibly because fertility and fawn survival rates increase in the presence of greater food supply) and most importantly to me that the deer behavior changed in a way that was not beneficial, the deer traveled less in search of food and became more nocturnal.  If you are hunting in an area like that you are going to suffer from it regardless of whether you hunt over bait or not IMO.  The baiting there appears to have been detrimental (again, no historical data) to the hunting experience (less movement, more nocturnal).
> 
> 4) I tried to draw a distinction that you either didn't catch or simply didn't want to acknowledge.  One question could be "if you put out bait will it make it easier for you to kill a deer" and I think the answer to that is obviously yes.  Another question would be "does legalized and widespread baiting result in overall higher or lower hunter success rates" and that answer, in the coastal plain of SC at the time of the study seems to be "lower" but again with no historical data (I think it has been going on there for a looong time, possibly never regulated).
> 
> 5) I don't think I was being creative with the long term vs. short term thing at all.  Based on my own logic plus the info from that study, I would expect that legalized hunting over bait will be at it's highest success rate when it first goes in to practice.  If you take a large piece of property where deer have never been hunted over bait and start hunting them over bait there this season, I expect that hunter success there will increase dramatically.  At some point I would expect it to level off and eventually very possibly to decrease as it may have done (no historical data) in the coastal plain of SC due to less deer movement for food and more nocturnal behavior.  How fast will the success rate go up and then back down?  I think it will go up sharply at first (not if you've already been baiting there illegally) and then level off and go back down below the previous success rate without bait very possibly, but I don't know how long the leveling off and later decrease would take.  I suspect that the response to baiting would be down from the beginning of the season to the end but deer activity usually decreases after the rut anyway and there are fewer deer left in the woods at that point anyway.  If there were a study on hunter success in the SZ starting last season (to give us historical data) I would expect hunter success this year (year 1 of legal baiting) to be at the peak and then lower in year 2 but probably still higher than year 0 (last year) and then after 2 or 3 years of baiting it might be like SC appears to have been and be down and stay there as long as there is legalized widespread baiting.  My assumption there would only be valid if there is a widespread acceptance of the new legalized baiting throughout the study area basically from day one, which is possible.  Maybe I'm wrong and it would all happen faster, but I don't think that there is any doubt that it will work at first (if you haven't already conditioned your deer this way with illegal hunting over bait in years past).
> 
> 5) Btw, the study did not gather data on the success rate of those who hunted over bait in the coastal plain vs. those who did not in the coastal plain, only on hunters in the coastal plain - where baiting is legal vs. hunters in the piedmont where baiting is illegal and that is a key difference.  This would address the question of whether it is easier for an individual hunter to have success by baiting or not.  There study was more focused on whether it was a good way (baiting) to hold back the growth of their "burgeoning" population.





HuntinDawg89 said:


> I don't understand why you chose the two quotes of mine above as evidence that I want to "argue it both ways."  Do you dispute that the pro-baiters think it will allow them to kill more deer?  There is perception and reality and they perceive that it will therefore they are excited it about it.  They think it will allow them to kill more and/or bigger deer with less effort.  Some of them think this because that has been true for them in the past when they were baiting illegally.  I think that one of the things to be learned from the study is that once the baiting becomes more widespread the deer will adjust over time in ways that the pro-baiters have not anticipated.
> 
> The pro-baiters are in favor because they think it will help them kill more and/or bigger deer with less effort (sure some just want to sell more feeders or corn, but generally..).  This is true (their motivations) whether 10,000 studies say it won't happen or not.



I wasn't making specific reference to those sections I just didn't want to quote the whole post cause it was long and I thought those were the most relevant.

Also, I think you may have forgotten what got this started.  That you don't believe the study but you quoted it for your purposes.  Now you are qualifying it and trying to point out its deficiencies.  But you've already quoted the portions you liked.  Thats more of the irony I was talking about in the first place.  You want to pick what you like about it and ignore and discount the rest.


----------



## shakey gizzard

Catdaddy SC said:


> Good post HD.
> 
> Dr. Ruth simply posted statistics from both areas which TENDS to lead one to a conclusion. He is a very smart man.
> 
> The one that jumps out and makes you think is the deer/auto collisions being less in the low country. What it points out is deer move further where there is no baiting.....exposing them to highways......or maybe they have move roads and traffic. I don't know the answer to the latter, but he put it there to suggest a correlation.
> 
> 
> Here's why I don't draw a conclusion from the report. This is representative on what I see on alot of hunts. On this property(600 acres), I haven't shot a deer(buck or doe in 2 years) and hunt it by myself. Most of my friends see the same where they hunt.....so I think hunters are more selective in my area than the rest of the state.........but that's speculation.



Dang, ya'll SC boys dont even shuck it?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> I wasn't making specific reference to those sections I just didn't want to quote the whole post cause it was long and I thought those were the most relevant.
> 
> Also, I think you may have forgotten what got this started.  That you don't believe the study but you quoted it for your purposes.  Now you are qualifying it and trying to point out its deficiencies.  But you've already quoted the portions you liked.  Thats more of the irony I was talking about in the first place.  You want to pick what you like about it and ignore and discount the rest.



So you've got to agree with every word or disagree with every word?  And I'm not really disagreeing with any of it, I just think that some parts of it are more telling than others and there are some other questions I would have loved to know the answers to - like historical hunter success rate in the area before baiting was legal and success of those who hunted over bait vs. those who did not within the area where baiting is legal....but that wasn't the purpose of the study.  It appears to me that the purpose of the study was to determine whether or not legalized "hunting" over bait was an effective way to halt or reverse the growth of the deer herd, so they addressed the questions that were most pertinent to that.

The part that I quoted that touched on ethics was something that I had already expressed (I believe) in this thread or another wasn't even a part of the study per se, it was just some background information for the benefit of those who might read the report.  It had nothing to do with the data and when I saw it, it reflected a major concern of mine, which is the perception of the non-hunting public.  Using their background material isn't cherry picking their results.  The study had already been linked, you seem to think you shouldn't quote any of it if you don't quote it all.  There is no purpose in quoting the whole thing, people already have the link if they want to read the whole thing.


----------



## shakey gizzard

GA DAWG said:


> If baiting was legal last year..This un would be dead..


Or this un!


----------



## CamoCop

DAVE said:


> Just as likely is that you anti-baiters are really just putting up a front because, you don't want the neighbors baiting, because it may draw deer away from the bait station you been using for years.



not so much their bait station but their property in general

we need a new smiley for "the sky is falling"


----------



## Rodney Holland

This is the way i see it.If they pass the law then let the whole state be able to bait or dont pass it at all !!


----------



## nickel back

GA DAWG said:


> So the keeping feeders full 200 yards out of site didn't do that and now because somebody can hunt over it does?



wrong,it does.....think about it.

its just going to get a lot worse now,instead of just some its going to be a bunch of feeders/bait/corn piles,the more food the less a deer will move.

Oak trees,when there is a good mass crop I hear hunters all the time say...heck the deer do not haft to go far to feed there is acorns every where.

which in turn means less to no sightings of deer.....


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Also, I think you may have forgotten what got this started.  That you don't believe the study but you quoted it for your purposes.



That is obviously your perception, but I still don't think that I have found fault with the conclusions of the study.  You seem to think the conclusions are much more universal and far reaching than they do.  Remember they cited studies that disagreed with them too.  I'm sure those other studies were just bunk though.


----------



## Lowjack

There goes the price of corn.


----------



## nickel back

....


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> So you've got to agree with every word or disagree with every word?  And I'm not really disagreeing with any of it, I just think that some parts of it are more telling than others and there are some other questions I would have loved to know the answers to - like historical hunter success rate in the area before baiting was legal and success of those who hunted over bait vs. those who did not within the area where baiting is legal....but that wasn't the purpose of the study.  It appears to me that the purpose of the study was to determine whether or not legalized "hunting" over bait was an effective way to halt or reverse the growth of the deer herd, so they addressed the questions that were most pertinent to that.
> 
> The part that I quoted that touched on ethics was something that I had already expressed (I believe) in this thread or another wasn't even a part of the study per se, it was just some background information for the benefit of those who might read the report.  It had nothing to do with the data and when I saw it, it reflected a major concern of mine, which is the perception of the non-hunting public.  Using their background material isn't cherry picking their results.  The study had already been linked, you seem to think you shouldn't quote any of it if you don't quote it all.  There is no purpose in quoting the whole thing, people already have the link if they want to read the whole thing.



The study clearly concludes that hunter effort does not decrease because of baiting.  Do you agree with that?

Well sorta, maybe, kinda, it depends?

No you don't have to disagree or agree with everything.  You can pick the parts you like.  Thats what most have done.  You've made some interesting points.  But look when you have as many issues with a source as you've pointed out with that one (don't forget at one point you implied that it should be ignored) and you disagree or refuse to acknowledge one of the primary conclusions, I personally feel you shouldn't then affirmatively use that same source to support your view point.

I understand that you just saw the thing about ethics and jumped on it.  And you didn't start out as one of those who has used the study in one thread when it suited you and then said it was malarky in another thread when it suited you.  Thats my bad, for thinking you were doing to begin with.  However, you do seem to flip flop around a bit.       

So what do make of all your fair chase, ethics, morals, etc. arguments against baiting now that you are saying in the long run baiting might actually make hunting harder?


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> That is obviously your perception, but I still don't think that I have found fault with the conclusions of the study.  You seem to think the conclusions are much more universal and far reaching than they do.  Remember they cited studies that disagreed with them too.  I'm sure those other studies were just bunk though.



Maybe you need to re-read the conclusion.  It was pretty clear to me that they stated that the data they gathered actually showed that baiting did not decrease hunter effort.  That conclusion directly contradicts your much earlier statement that baiting makes hunting easier (which you have now changed to baiting may make hunting easier in the short term but may make it harder in the long run).

If you feel that the study was lacking in some ways or that they meant to limit that conclusion to a certain area of SC then that just supports my point that you shouldn't use the study to advance your arguments here in GA.  But even if that is your position (that their conclusion was speaking to a certain area and certain factors) that "limited" conclusion would still directly contradict your general statement that baiting makes hunting easier.  Which is all I've ever said.


----------



## SneekEE

nickel back said:


> wrong,it does.....think about it.
> 
> its just going to get a lot worse now,instead of just some its going to be a bunch of feeders/bait/corn piles,the more food the less a deer will move.
> 
> Oak trees,when there is a good mass crop I hear hunters all the time say...heck the deer do not haft to go far to feed there is acorns every where.
> 
> which in turn means less to no sightings of deer.....



You are correct. I grew up in a lil ole place that allowed baiting. When every one first starts to bait, deer come running, it is a slaughter. You see deer each time ya go. Then they start to get smart. Soon the ascociate corn, with KABOOM!!! and since the yeller stuff is ever war, why risk feeding in the day. So they lay up, and feed at night. U may still have a few does come around, but if the rut aint on, the bucks wont go near a corn pile during the day, not the seasoned ones any way. At least thats been my experance.


----------



## thomas williams

Congrats to yall acorn goat hunters! Next thang ya know everybody will be crying b/c they aren't any deer left!


----------



## Scrub Buck

What a mess, 

My Thoughts....

For those who choose not to do it here is my advice:

You just figured out how to cut off the person who provided the bait.  Not that hard to do.  All you have to do is find the largest bait pile and you are golden.  I spent five years in Michigan when unlimited quantaties of baiting was allowed and did the same thing.If I didn't do it I woldn't see any deer.  Am I proud of it now ,...no.  I never put an ounce of bait out.  Yet killed deer every year.  Most of them more than 500 yards from the bait pile.  Altering natural movement of animals only leads to hunter conflict.  Did I face alot of it, yes.  When a gun goes off close to someone they are going to see who did it and it always leads to conflict.  I was just as entitled to be there as the person who put out the bait.  We just hunted different ways legal within the law.  Yet they were always mad at me for what I did.  I told them if they didn't put out the bait and bring the deer to the area.  I would not have ever been there.  Because, the deer wouldn't either.  As I sit and reflect on things that happened over twenty years ago.....will I do the same thing again.  The answer is yes.  Am I going to put up with the same thing I did then.  No, because I did nothing wrong.  I followed the law.   I would like to respectfully salute all supporters on the mess you created for not only me, but other that have the same belief as I do.  The supporters biggest phrase is "no one should be able to tell me how I should hunt".  Nor should you tell anyone else.  I'm sure that quote will be reversed in years to come.


----------



## General Lee

Why don't all of you folks that talk about learning to "pattern deer" learn how to pattern them on the way to or from a feeder?


----------



## KKrueger

I just figured I should weigh in on this.

There I did it.


----------



## G Duck

I don't think we are all here yet.  Some folks ma have not found it yet over here in general hunting. 
roll call.  
Randy ? Rex ? You all here yet?
270? uyd4l?


----------



## emusmacker

Randy said:


> Great example.  Probably he will not see that buck eating his apples after season comes in unless he is there during the night because that wise old buck will feel the pressure and only visit those growing apples during the night.  Now if you just pour yours out and leave them there all the time you probably won't see him either unless you are there at night.
> 
> However once all his apples are gone and the buck is left with nothing growing on the tree to eat at night and you only put your apples out during the daylight hours that buck will have to visit that food during the daylight to get something to eat and there is your advantage.  Works even better with corn.  If you have ever used a feeder before you know it makes a terrible racket when it goes off.  A diner bell so to speak.  Set it for 1/2 hour after daylight and they get in the habit of visiting it then.  They know that the corn will not last long on the ground and they have to get there right after the diner bell in order to get some.  In fact, animals become so habitualized if you do it right and long enough that you can even know when it is close to going off.  I can asure you that about 15 minutes before it goes off that birds will start congregating and waiting on it to go off.  Yes it is that simple and yes it works just like that.  Yes I know it does I have seen it.  I have heard pigs just off in the bush waiting till the feeder went off.  The can be traiined to come to the sound of the feeder.
> 
> Same thing happens out in Texas.  The Rancher drives you out to your stand, dumps corn on the ground and leaves.  The deer/animlas hear his truck leave and know that corn is on the ground.  He trains them that way.  Just like a farmer who feeds his cows.  When they hear that truck or tractor coming the come running in for feed.  Simple really.
> 
> In fact, I suggest you feed from your 4 wheeler.  just drive in to your stand drop off the corn drive your 4 wheeler off adn go back and get in your stand.  Do that enough and your deer will be trained.  Now why does this not normally work.  I take time to condition these animals to this butonce they are it is simple!



Great responce, but why is a food plot that is planted just for the purpose of drawing deer into a certain area ok but putting several different feeders throughout the property and hunting over them not ok. Just seems to me that both are 1 and the same just 1 takes a tad more work.


----------



## 270 guy

G Duck said:


> I don't think we are all here yet.  Some folks ma have not found it yet over here in general hunting.
> roll call.
> Randy ? Rex ? You all here yet?
> 270? uyd4l?



Present


----------



## Randy

emusmacker said:


> Great responce, but why is a food plot that is planted just for the purpose of drawing deer into a certain area ok but putting several different feeders throughout the property and hunting over them not ok. Just seems to me that both are 1 and the same just 1 takes a tad more work.



I just explained that to you.  Feeders can be manipulated to make deer come right when you want them to.  They can visit food plots any time.  The deer will learn quickly to avoid food plots during the day.  Food plots and openings in general are also good changes in habitat for lots of game.


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> Food plots and openings in general are also good changes in habitat for lots of game.


Especially when there's a big feeder full of corn in the middle of them............


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> How many times are you going to change it up? First you said the state then you said you would still hunt but call yourself a shooter .......now you say the whole state. Give up your digging a deeper hole each time. If you don't want to bait don't it's not that hard to understand. I have killed my biggest bucks in states that have baiting and they weren't killed anywhere near bait.



I thought I already explained that.  When I said I would quit hunting if baiting was legalized in this I assumed they would do it throughout the state.  I had no idea they would divide us.  Presently it is only the southern part of the state that is loosing the right to hunt.  Had I thought this legislator was going to be to scared to try and get it state wide I would have stated it differently.


----------



## gsubo

Did I really just recieve an email from GON letting me know that this stupid bill passed the house???


Guess they didnt get the memo that not everyone is happy about it.


----------



## shdw633

Scrub Buck said:


> What a mess,
> 
> My Thoughts....
> 
> For those who choose not to do it here is my advice:
> 
> You just figured out how to cut off the person who provided the bait.  Not that hard to do.  All you have to do is find the largest bait pile and you are golden.  I spent five years in Michigan when unlimited quantaties of baiting was allowed and did the same thing.If I didn't do it I woldn't see any deer.  Am I proud of it now ,...no.  I never put an ounce of bait out.  Yet killed deer every year.  Most of them more than 500 yards from the bait pile.  Altering natural movement of animals only leads to hunter conflict.  Did I face alot of it, yes.  When a gun goes off close to someone they are going to see who did it and it always leads to conflict.  I was just as entitled to be there as the person who put out the bait.  We just hunted different ways legal within the law.  Yet they were always mad at me for what I did.  I told them if they didn't put out the bait and bring the deer to the area.  I would not have ever been there.  Because, the deer wouldn't either.  As I sit and reflect on things that happened over twenty years ago.....will I do the same thing again.  The answer is yes.  Am I going to put up with the same thing I did then.  No, because I did nothing wrong.  I followed the law.   I would like to respectfully salute all supporters on the mess you created for not only me, but other that have the same belief as I do.  The supporters biggest phrase is "no one should be able to tell me how I should hunt".  Nor should you tell anyone else.  I'm sure that quote will be reversed in years to come.



I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.  I grew up in Michigan, hunted it my whole life, I own property up there as well as my wife and my family all live up there and hunt and I have NEVER, EVER came across what you are talking about nor have I ever heard anyone else come across that.  That has not occurred in any of my experiences hunting in Florida nor have I ever heard of it happening to any of my buddies that hunt Kentucky and South Carolina.  I have spent 11 years hunting leases in Georgia and  I have done nothing but tip toe around feeders and corn piles on every lease I have been on.  Leases that had both Florida and Georgia hunters on em, so as far as I can tell nothing is going to change other than you don't have to tip toe around your lease anymore scared you sat down next to a pile of corn you didn't know was there.  As far as habits changing the only habit I see changing is anti-baiters putting out corn to hunt over, saying how "they have to cause the property next to me is doing it", just like every property next to you is  "brown it's down club".


----------



## Spotlite

Paymaster said:


> Having a wake at my place this weekend for fair chase hunting in Georgia. R.I.P. my ole friend.


There will still be fair chase on spots place.........


Randy said:


> Great example.  Probably he will not see that buck eating his apples after season comes in unless he is there during the night because that wise old buck will feel the pressure and only visit those growing apples during the night.  Now if you just pour yours out and leave them there all the time you probably won't see him either unless you are there at night.
> 
> However once all his apples are gone and the buck is left with nothing growing on the tree to eat at night and you only put your apples out during the daylight hours that buck will have to visit that food during the daylight to get something to eat and there is your advantage.  Works even better with corn.


Im not an advocate for baiting, but wouldnt that nocturnal buck wait until after dark to eat anyway, even if you poured apples and corn out all day? There are way too many trail cam pics of good mature bucks at a feeder during the daylight hours.     


bobcat said:


> Looks like all the hunters who wanted to bait are fixing to possibly get it .There gonna really get it when timber companies go up about 10 dollars an acre and all the southern counties that have plantations start leasing all the dirt for guided hunts !!Its coming so get ready for it ! i know of 3 plantations thats gonna get a bunch of land when it passes .!!!!!! Guess wmas will get really crowded huh



I think if you saw a $10 per acre jump in lease prices........you would see alot of unleased properties. Bait is not going to cause prices to go up no more than cross bows or scopes did.


----------



## Randy

gsubo said:


> Did I really just recieve an email from GON letting me know that this stupid bill passed the house???
> 
> 
> Guess they didnt get the memo that not everyone is happy about it.



Yes you did as did I.  And i have not had a suscription for years.  It has been their agenda for a long time.  I imagine they are proud.


----------



## General Lee

shdw633 said:


> I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.  I grew up in Michigan, hunted it my whole life, I own property up there as well as my wife and my family all live up there and hunt and I have NEVER, EVER came across what you are talking about nor have I ever heard anyone else come across that.  That has not occurred in any of my experiences hunting in Florida nor have I ever heard of it happening to any of my buddies that hunt Kentucky and South Carolina.  I have spent 11 years hunting leases in Georgia and  I have done nothing but tip toe around feeders and corn piles on every lease I have been on.  Leases that had both Florida and Georgia hunters on em, so as far as I can tell nothing is going to change other than you don't have to tip toe around your lease anymore scared you sat down next to a pile of corn you didn't know was there.  As far as habits changing the only habit I see changing is anti-baiters putting out corn to hunt over, saying how "they have to cause the property next to me is doing it", just like every property next to you is  "brown it's down club".


Good post.I don't think most folks actually realize how much baiting goes on or they don't want to think about it.I'm serious when I say the locals around here sit around and joke about it.Baiting is as common as going one mile over the speed limit......


----------



## shdw633

Randy said:


> I thought I already explained that.  When I said I would quit hunting if baiting was legalized in this I assumed they would do it throughout the state.  I had no idea they would divide us.  Presently it is only the southern part of the state that is loosing the right to hunt.  Had I thought this legislator was going to be to scared to try and get it state wide I would have stated it differently.



How would you have stated it differently?  Just quit for a year?  Not go on opening day anymore?  What would you have done if you knew it was going to be this way?  

You have already demonstrated you have hunt over bait in the past and I believe you will most likely do it again when this all calms down and you realize that you made a big deal out of nothing.  Remember, you can always say you were eradicating them deer, just like you did with them hogs!!


----------



## Randy

shdw633 said:


> How would you have stated it differently?  Just quit for a year?  Not go on opening day anymore?  What would you have done if you knew it was going to be this way?
> 
> You have already demonstrated you have hunt over bait in the past and I believe you will most likely do it again when this all calms down and you realize that you made a big deal out of nothing.  Remember, you can always say you were eradicating them deer, just like you did with them hogs!!


Good Lord man listen.  Had I know this chicken legislator was going to only go for the south end of the state I would have said "if baiting was ever legalized in the area I hunt, I will quit hunting.". And in fact that is my statement.  I have NEVER hunted over bait.  IMO it is impossible to hunt over bait.  It is NOT hunting.  It is a simple way to shoot game as proven by my 74 yo mother-in-law.  It is merely shooting nothing more.


----------



## Randy

General Lee said:


> Good post.I don't think most folks actually realize how much baiting goes on or they don't want to think about it.I'm serious when I say the locals around here sit around and joke about it.Baiting is as common as going one mile over the speed limit......



I will say you guys have convinced me there are indeed a lot of poachers in this state.  And no I did not want to believe it.  Everybody I hunt with are ethical hunters but based on a lot of yall's posts I am convinced now that this state does appear to ahve a lot of poachers.  Yes that makes me sad, no I did not want to believe it.


----------



## G Duck

General Lee said:


> Good post.I don't think most folks actually realize how much baiting goes on or they don't want to think about it.I'm serious when I say the locals around here sit around and joke about it.Baiting is as common as going one mile over the speed limit......



That is so true. If you dont realize it, you are living in a bubble. You can buy corn by the 50# bag at about every other rural minit market. I think the main thing that will change is people will come out of the closet, and talk about it more. They will not have to sneak around and hide the corn bags from everyone.  That will give the appearance that it is on the rise, when it is  been going on the whole time.


----------



## georgiabow

i wonder..... out of the nothern zone folks who are dead against this bill, i bet a decent percentage would be all for it if was for nothern zone instead of southern zone......


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> I will say you guys have convinced me there are indeed a lot of poachers in this state.  And no I did not want to believe it.  Everybody I hunt with are ethical hunters but based on a lot of yall's posts I am convinced now that this state does appear to ahve a lot of poachers.  Yes that makes me sad, no I did not want to believe it.



I felt the same way over on the turkey forum. they had a poll asking "If you heard a gobbler across the property line, would you go after it" or something like that. I was shocked at the response. At least they were honest poachers I guess.
I am afraid that there are many more Baiters than poachers out there. That may be represented by the votes. We will never know how many folks called the politicians telling them that it is a good thing.


----------



## rex upshaw

Randy said:


> Yes you did as did I.  And i have not had a suscription for years.  It has been their agenda for a long time.  I imagine they are proud.



I've got no use for those clowns.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> I just explained that to you.  Feeders can be manipulated to make deer come right when you want them to.  They can visit food plots any time.  The deer will learn quickly to avoid food plots during the day.  Food plots and openings in general are also good changes in habitat for lots of game.



Not everyone uses feeders most folks I know sling it on the ground and scatter it so it doesn't sour. That is the exact same thing as a bait plot they both draw deer in for a kill shot  and nothing more. Most all property in GA has plenty of habitat for the game. Talk until your blue in the face your never going to change the fact they are both the same no matter how hard one is verses the other. Planted or scattered they both feed deer and attract them to the property they are being used on.


----------



## Randy

G Duck said:


> I felt the same way over on the turkey forum. they had a poll asking "If you heard a gobbler across the property line, would you go after it" or something like that. I was shocked at the response. At least they were honest poachers I guess.
> I am afraid that there are many more Baiters than poachers out there. That may be represented by the votes. We will never know how many folks called the politicians telling them that it is a good thing.



I also think that based on what many here have posted about how rampant poaching is in the south that there may indeed be many that are not poachers but do feel they do not have an equal chance at a deer since they so not want to poach and their neighbors do.  It makes a hunter sad really.  Almost enough to make one turn against hunting.  I am not there yet.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> I thought I already explained that.  When I said I would quit hunting if baiting was legalized in this I assumed they would do it throughout the state.  I had no idea they would divide us.  Presently it is only the southern part of the state that is loosing the right to hunt.  Had I thought this legislator was going to be to scared to try and get it state wide I would have stated it differently.


 So when it passes for the whole state next year or two then your going to put your weapon up and give it up right?


----------



## Spotlite

georgiabow said:


> i wonder..... out of the nothern zone folks who are dead against this bill, i bet a decent percentage would be all for it if was for nothern zone instead of southern zone......



Im against it. But I agree, Im sure there are plenty of folks that would be all for it if it were in the Northen zone.


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> Not everyone uses feeders most folks I know sling it on the ground and scatter it so it doesn't sour. That is the exact same thing as a bait plot they both draw deer in for a kill shot  and nothing more. Most all property in GA has plenty of habitat for the game. Talk until your blue in the face your never going to change the fact they are both the same no matter how hard one is verses the other. Planted or scattered they both feed deer and attract them to the property they are being used on.


Oh I realize those who do not see the difference never will.  It is the same with those who see baiting as hunting.  If one truely does not understand the difference well .....


----------



## david w.

The Southern zone wont have any deer left when this is over...


----------



## BowChilling

GON changed their position on baiting simply because the "camo coalition" aka Georgia Wildlife Federation opposed it. It's a shame these 2 organiztions can't work together for the sportsmen who support them both!


----------



## turtlebug

First of all, Jason Shaw DOES NOT speak for the entire Southern Zone and should be booted.  

http://onlineathens.com/stories/031611/spo_800335327.shtml


Deer baiting debate revived by legislation

By Rob Pavey - Augusta Chronicle

Published Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Buzz up!Jason Shaw sees the deer baiting controversy as a simple matter of geography.


 "I think it's overwhelmingly favored in the southern part of (Georgia)," he said. "Most of the opposition we see is in the northern part."

The state representative from Lakeland is the sponsor of House Bill 277 that would, among other things, legalize shooting deer over bait.

Unlike similar efforts in past years, his 2011 bill survived a series of heated committee meetings in Atlanta last week and may very well emerge for a full vote.

Opponents, however, say the opinions are separated by much more than geography.

"It's like a boomerang - it just keeps coming back," said veteran wildlife biologist Joe Hamilton, who is also the founder of the Bogart-based Quality Deer Management Association. "They tried it in '06, '07, '08 - nothing in '09 - and in 2010, and now it's back again."

As a national group, the QDMA works to promote sustainable whitetail populations, ethical hunting practices, adequate doe harvests and restraint in taking young bucks.

And while the group does not lobby to eliminate baiting in states where it is already legal, the organization is quick to share sound science and the many reasons it is simply not a good idea.

Hamilton, who testified before a House subcommittee on the matter, joined Georgia's Wildlife Resources Division in opposing the baiting bill, which - as written - would legalize the practice in the state's southern zone counties.

Other opponents include the Georgia Wildlife Federation.

One of the primary arguments against baiting is that it violates fair-chase ethics and will erode the public's image of hunting.

There are also scientific reasons, such as the potential for spreading disease by concentrating deer in smaller areas.

"It decreases the incentive for food plots, which offer a good supply of food long after the season," Hamilton said. "It also means a person with access to small acreage can dump truckloads of corn and pull in deer from a larger area, making the other landowners use bait even if they don't want to. It's called defensive baiting."

Many states, including Georgia and South Carolina, have experienced a decline in deer populations that some believe is caused by a surge in coyote numbers.

Baiting can create more opportunities for predators, especially involving does with young deer.

In a letter last week to its Georgia members, QDMA summed it up this way:

"We have it very good in Georgia. We have a bag limit that allows for wise management of local deer populations. We harvest more record-book bucks than any other state in the Southeast except Kentucky. Only 37 percent of our buck harvest is made up of 11/2-year-old bucks (yearlings), one of the lowest rates in the nation. We are among the nation's leading states in doe harvest, taking nearly two antlerless deer for every antlered buck. Hunting over bait would do nothing to improve that."

Georgia is also one of the nation's top destinations for non-resident deer hunters, many of whom live in Florida, a state where baiting is legal.

"If hunting over bait is so great, why do all those Floridians leave their home state to come here, where they can't hunt over bait?" the QDMA's letter asked. "Because we have great deer hunting in Georgia, and this was achieved through sound wildlife management conducted by professionals." pop

Shaw acknowledges both sides of the issue, but also noted that - if baiting becomes legal - those who oppose it are free to not do it. He said he also added a provision to the bill that would require landowner permission for baiting.

"We are making changes to try and make everyone happy," he said. "We just want to do what the people want. It is a private, personal, property rights issue and landowners have a right to decide what's being done on their land."


----------



## deermeat270

I havent read all 470ish posts.  Is anyone talking about hog hunting in the Northern Zone over bait?  How is this enforceable?  



> House Passes Amended Baiting Bill
> 
> The Georgia House of Representatives voted 122 to 48 to pass HB 277, the "Baiting Bill," which would make it legal in the Southern Zone to hunt deer and hogs with no distance requirement from feeders or food like corn spread on the ground. From its original version that would have legalized baiting for deer and hogs statewide, HB 277 was amended so deer hunters in the Northern Zone would still have to be 200 yards and out of sight of bait. The current version of HB 277 makes hog hunting over bait legal in the Northern Zone.
> 
> HB 277 now moves to the Senate, where it must pass in its current form or be sent back to committee. If passed by the Senate, Gov. Nathan Deal would have to sign the bill before it became law.
> 
> For more details on the House passage of HB 277, see the article on www.gon.com.


----------



## Randy

BowChilling said:


> GON changed their position on baiting simply because the "camo coalition" aka Georgia Wildlife Federation opposed it. It's a shame these 2 organiztions can't work together for the sportsmen who support them both!



That may be but I think it is more about selling magazines.  Much like Rush or those other talk shows, keeping people stirred up sales.


----------



## georgia_home

I don't know, it may be a wash. North guys that want to bait may go south, and south guys that don't want to bait may come north... 

One thing I don't understand, IF this passes, it doesn't mean you have to bait if you hunt south. Why are so many people acting this they MUST bait if it passes?

Like Nancy Reagan said, just say no! 

Your lease can set it's own rules, in the same way some do now with regards to antler size or number of deer you can shoot.

Why get your panties in a bunch? Just enjoy what you have. Quitcher!



Randy said:


> I bet there will be an influx of
> hunters to the north.  I may have to raise my lease rates.


----------



## Randy

deermeat270 said:


> I havent read all 470ish posts.  Is anyone talking about hog hunting in the Northern Zone over bait?  How is this enforceable?



What do you mean enforceable?  It is law.


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> Yes you did as did I.  And i have not had a suscription for years.  It has been their agenda for a long time.  I imagine they are proud.



I got an email from GON a few days ago, that to me, sounded like they were trying to rally folks agianst it?
That is the way it came off to me. Mr Burch said if you are against it "now is the time to speak, or forever hold your peace" They should have sent that out about two months ago.


----------



## Spotlite

270 guy said:


> Not everyone uses feeders most folks I know sling it on the ground and scatter it so it doesn't sour. That is the exact same thing as a bait plot they both draw deer in for a kill shot  and nothing more. Most all property in GA has plenty of habitat for the game. Talk until your blue in the face your never going to change the fact they are both the same no matter how hard one is verses the other. Planted or scattered they both feed deer and attract them to the property they are being used on.



True to a point, they both draw deer in for the kill. But where they differ is: a food plot is like a buffet and is open 24/7 and provides longterm nutrition where as throwing or scattering or even filling feeders with corn is like placing an order at the drive-through and is only intended to satisfy for the "moment".  

That being said, Im an anti baiter, but I plant. So go figure


----------



## deermeat270

Randy said:


> What do you mean enforceable?  It is law.



One could conceivably say, "that bait that is 50 yards away from me while deer hunting is for hogs."


----------



## Randy

If you had read all the debate you would have seen why.  You will not have the option to bait or not if you want to see deer.  Animals go where the food is.





georgia_home said:


> I don't know, it may be a wash. North guys that want to bait may go south, and south guys that don't want to bait may come north...
> 
> One thing I don't understand, IF this passes, it doesn't mean you have to bait if you hunt south. Why are so many people acting this they MUST bait if it passes?
> 
> Like Nancy Reagan said, just say no!
> 
> Your lease can set it's own rules, in the same way some do now with regards to antler size or number of deer you can shoot.
> 
> Why get your panties in a bunch? Just enjoy what you have. Quitcher!


----------



## emusmacker

Randy, may i ask you do you consider sitting in a ground blind on the edge of a food plot hunting or shooting?  And yes my 73 yr old dad killed a deer over a plot. Was he hunting or shooting?


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> Oh I realize those who do not see the difference never will.  It is the same with those who see baiting as hunting.  If one truely does not understand the difference well .....


Didn't I read something on here about you and bait *sunflower seeds) back when? Didn't you say hogs is all you hunt over or near bait?

 Most all the post I see about you are ones where your complaining about something. Are you ever happy? 

You whinned about not having turkeys on your property and stopping turkey hunting and now you wont stop whinning about deer and bait and you not hunting after you keep adding stipulations to it. 

If your that unhappy just give it up totally and be done. Baiting isn't hunting Hunting is hunting baiting is just a tool some choose to use to hunt with. Sorry you can't understand that. It's a tool just like a bow or rifle or bait plot is.  maybe one day you will stop all the complaining abd enjoy hunting.............. Nah I doubt it.


----------



## pcann

I don't know what to think at this time. I have a friend that has a club 1 mile from the southern zone. He is worried all his deer are going to stay near the corn and off his club. 

Lets see how much the price of a bag of corn goes up.


----------



## 270 guy

Spotlite said:


> True to a point, they both draw deer in for the kill. But where they differ is: a food plot is like a buffet and is open 24/7 and provides longterm nutrition where as throwing or scattering or even filling feeders with corn is like placing an order at the drive-through and is only intended to satisfy for the "moment".
> 
> That being said, Im an anti baiter, but I plant. So go figure



Most hunters are only there for the moment and not 24/7 so they are both the same as far as hunting goes If you plant your a baiter down deep inside.


----------



## 68DRUMMER

Now let me make sure i understand this.  It will be legal to hunt deer over corn in say for instance: Wilkinson Co., (where we don't see many deer at all) but not in Bibb, Jones, or Monroe(where we are run-over with deer)? Something ain't adding up!


----------



## kmckinnie

Could you put out feed for quail and hunt around it in Ga, last year on plantations! Wild birds!!!!!!! Anyone know? SOWEGA


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> If you had read all the debate you would have seen why.  You will not have the option to bait or not if you want to see deer.  Animals go where the food is.



 You have no clue, you keep spewing this garbage all the time. I have 5 deer mounted that came from baiting states and properties that do bait..... NONE were killed near bait all were killed in the woods. You do have a choice if your a good enough hunter.


----------



## Randy

emusmacker said:


> Randy, may i ask you do you consider sitting in a ground blind on the edge of a food plot hunting or shooting?  And yes my 73 yr old dad killed a deer over a plot. Was he hunting or shooting?



Remember I said it is my opinion.  If your father was taken to the edge of some food plot and sat down and a deer walked by and he shot it, he did not "hunt" that deer.  It is the same reason I have no desire to go on a guided hunt out west somewhere.  Having some guide sit me in a stand and tell me a deer he has patterned will walk out in this field soon shoot him.  That is exactly what I would have done, shot it.  I would have no way in my opinion have "hunted" that deer.  That is my opinion.  Heck some people consider sitting around hunting camp hunting.

That said if your Dad felt like he was hunting great.


----------



## fredw

deermeat270 said:


> I havent read all 470ish posts.  Is anyone talking about hog hunting in the Northern Zone over bait?  How is this enforceable?


deermeat, as punishment for posting in this thread, you need to read all 470ish posts before you can get an answer to your question.

Some folks have mentioned pigs and bait in the northern zone but most are talking deer, ethics, and politics.


----------



## georgia_home

Randy, lifes too short.

I know your 'tude. "if you don't hunt my way, your wrong"

As long as I hunt legally, your opinion means exactly 0 to me. I reckon you feel the same. We can kindly agree to disagree.

Have a good season! Where you hunt, do whatever is right for you, and legal, and don't worry about everyone else. It ain't worth the ulcer or heart attack the stress can cause!



Randy said:


> If you had read all the debate you would have seen why.  You will not have the option to bait or not if you want to see deer.  Animals go where the food is.


----------



## Randy

kmckinnie said:


> Could you put out feed for quail and hunt around it in Ga, last year on plantations! Wild birds!!!!!!! Anyone know? SOWEGA



No.  The new law only applies to deer and hogs.


----------



## kmckinnie

kmckinnie said:


> Could you put out feed for quail and hunt around it in Ga, last year on plantations! Wild birds!!!!!!! Anyone know? SOWEGA



Well what is or was the law on this!


----------



## dacdac

*house bill 277*

can any one tell me where the southern zone ends and the northeren zone begins


----------



## Spotlite

270 guy said:


> Most hunters are only there for the moment and not 24/7 so they are both the same as far as hunting goes If you plant your a baiter down deep inside.



Yeah but the difference is for the deer.............in a plot they dont have to wait at the next window to place an order

And that was deep, that hurt


----------



## kmckinnie

I was wondering if this was the reason? I work on a little plantation in fla! They have more wild bird than ANYBODY! They feed them! Deer are a pest!


----------



## Echo

Has anyone seen any wording on how this could affect WMA's in the southern zone? If they were open to baiting it would be absurd just trying to find a spot that had not already been baited and claimed by another.


----------



## buckfiddy

All I have to say about it is...It's about time they listened to what the majority of hunters in the state wanted.


----------



## Randy

kmckinnie said:


> Well what is or was the law on this!



Once this law is passed.  You can hunt deer and hogs over placed feed/bait.  No there game can be hunted over bait.


----------



## Randy

Echo said:


> Has anyone seen any wording on how this could affect WMA's in the southern zone? If they were open to baiting it would be absurd just trying to find a spot that had not already been baited and claimed by another.



Baiting will only be allowed on public land.


----------



## tullisfireball

my question is, if it is signed into law will the tickets issued in the southern zone for hunting over bait still be valid if they haven't been to court yet? 
They may be some people paying fine a legal activity


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> Most hunters are only there for the moment and not 24/7 so they are both the same as far as hunting goes If you plant your a baiter down deep inside.



I don't plant either.  Tried it once didn't get the results and didn't like sitting on a food plot waiting on something to walk by.


----------



## Randy

tullisfireball said:


> my question is, if it is signed into law will the tickets issued in the southern zone for hunting over bait still be valid if they haven't been to court yet?
> They may be some people paying fine a legal activity



Tickets are NEVER a validation of wrong doing.  It is merely a citation that you may have done something wrong.  You are not guilty until you either admit you are and pay the fine or you take it to court and found guilty.


----------



## emusmacker

Randy said:


> Remember I said it is my opinion.  If your father was taken to the edge of some food plot and sat down and a deer walked by and he shot it, he did not "hunt" that deer.  It is the same reason I have no desire to go on a guided hunt out west somewhere.  Having some guide sit me in a stand and tell me a deer he has patterned will walk out in this field soon shoot him.  That is exactly what I would have done, shot it.  I would have no way in my opinion have "hunted" that deer.  That is my opinion.  Heck some people consider sitting around hunting camp hunting.
> 
> That said if your Dad felt like he was hunting great.



I agree that is your opinion, and I respect it, but what's the difference of me sitting my dad on the trail head where a deer comes into my plot as opposed to sitting him on a trail head that leads to a bedding area, he's still hunting the same way and yes he shoots the deer he hunted. I personally don't see the difference in plots versus baits. 

One could even argue that a plot helps long term, I beg to differ, most plots are planted in wheat or rye or oats and only last a few months, whereas if you have several feeders spread around, and kept them full and maintained, you would really provide long term benefits. For example, supplemental feeding, only now, it can legally be done all year and hunted over, just like supplemental plots. Am I correct?


----------



## Randy

By the way, whether or not you or I agree on whether sitting over bait or a food plot is "hunting" or not that is a small issue in this debate to me.  That is just our opinions.  Other issues matter more.



emusmacker said:


> One could even argue that a plot helps long term, I beg to differ, most plots are planted in wheat or rye or oats and only last a few months, whereas if you have several feeders spread around, and kept them full and maintained, you would really provide long term benefits. For example, supplemental feeding, only now, it can legally be done all year and hunted over, just like supplemental plots. Am I correct?


you might be right.  Although food plots that just get abandoned and become openings in the woods are beneficial to animals.  Feeders with corn even year round are of little benefit to game.  Other types of protein pellets may be.


----------



## maker4life

South Georgia is covered in hundreds of thousands of acres of cropland . If you're land is pines or hardwoods and the neighbors have big corn or peanut fields who's baiting then ?

I'm not really a deer hunter but I know very well down here putting corn out doesn't gurantee a deer like some think . Not when you're competing with the hundred acre soybean field next door .

I honestly could go either way on it .


----------



## buckfiddy

I have hunted in states that allow baiting, believe me it's not like shooting fish in a barrel. This will not be as big of a change as some believe it will be.


----------



## emusmacker

Randy said:


> By the way, whether or not you or I agree on whether sitting over bait or a food plot is "hunting" or not that is a small issue in this debate to me.  That is just our opinions.  Other issues matter more.
> 
> 
> you might be right.  Although food plots that just get abandoned and become openings in the woods are beneficial to animals.  Feeders with corn even year round are of little benefit to game.  Other types of protein pellets may be.



So then instead of corn feeders, protein pellet feeders year round that can be hunted over is OK?  and as far as abandoned food plots helping other game, corn also feeds coons, birds, etc, but we're discussing deer. 

And it does matter to an extent of whether or not hunting or shooting deer as differing opinions matter. Personally I get a little offended when I'm called a shooter and not a hunter. I mean sitting 30 feet up a tree waiting on a deer that I'ved scouted and patterned with a scoped rifle could arguably be disputed as hunting. I mean what is your definition of a hunter?


----------



## emusmacker

Also do you retract your previous statements of calling baiters poachers now?


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> Baiting will only be allowed on public land.


Wrong answer. It will be on private land only.............


----------



## Randy

General Lee said:


> Wrong answer. It will be on private land only.............



Thanks for catching that.  Thinking one thing and typing another.  It is tuff on this IPhone!


----------



## Randy

emusmacker said:


> Also do you retract your previous statements of calling baiters poachers now?



No.  Those who have been hunting over bait and even those who continue to until this law is passed are by definition poachers.  What is funny and what makes me so mad is these legislators have made it possible for you to be a poacher on one end of the state and legally hunting on the other even though you are doing the same thing.  Again it is what happens when you put people in charge of setting rules they know nothing about.  As I said earlier they have divided us.  The anti's are loving this.


----------



## Randy

emusmacker said:


> And it does matter to an extent of whether or not hunting or shooting deer as differing opinions matter. Personally I get a little offended when I'm called a shooter and not a hunter. I mean sitting 30 feet up a tree waiting on a deer that I'ved scouted and patterned with a scoped rifle could arguably be disputed as hunting. I mean what is your definition of a hunter?



Again it is my opinion but what you just described as scouting and patterning a deer is what I consider hunting and what I find enjoyable about hunting.  When it takes no skill, like sitting over a feeder is not hunting to me.  But again that is not really the issue with baiting.


----------



## georgia_home

*Nothing to get too worked up over...*

R, just a question here. There are lots of situations like you note about 2 hunters in this state that could be doing exactly the same thing, and one being legal, the other not.

Do those confuse you also? I chalk them up to "the way things are". For example, if you hunt south and I hunt north, say your in maybe hancock and I am Forsyth county, and assuming I recall correctly hancock is south....

If we both shoot a deer on January 3, with 243, I am illegal and you ain't.

If the same scenario happens on november 9, and we both shoot a 4 point, your a poacher and I ain't. Hancock is trophy county.

These scenarios, and getting worked up over them, is kinda silly. Relax, get some shut eye, dream about turkey or deer season.



Randy said:


> No.  Those who have been hunting over bait and even those who continue to until this law is passed are by definition poachers.  What is funny and what makes me so mad is these legislators have made it possible for you to be a poacher on one end of the state and legally hunting on the other even though you are doing the same thing.  Again it is what happens when you put people in charge of setting rules they know nothing about.  As I said earlier they have divided us.  The anti's are loving this.


----------



## donald-f

Maybe the lease prices will go up for the southern zone and come down for the north. I hunt only northern zone, maybe when all of the deer are gone from the south the northern zone will not have openings in the northern zone to offer them when they want to rejoin us.


----------



## Randy

georgia_home said:


> These scenarios, and getting worked up over them, is kinda silly. Relax, get some shut eye, dream about turkey or deer season.


you have a point.  Who am I to think this sport will always be the sport I love.  Things change.  Times change.  It is sad but it is life.  Some times you just have to give up things when they are no longer something you can enjoy.  You guys enjoy your newly defined sport or what ever you want to call it.  I think I will just go fishing.  Heck I can't eat fried deer meat anymore anyway since the heart attack


----------



## 270 guy

Would all the anti hunters reading this thread please chime in on this subject. I want to really see how many of you thereare following it like some seem to think. Just speak up and let us know your following it.

Thank You!


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> Again it is my opinion but what you just described as scouting and patterning a deer is what I consider hunting and what I find enjoyable about hunting.  When it takes no skill, like sitting over a feeder is not hunting to me.  But again that is not really the issue with baiting.



What skill is there in sitting over a trail or sitting over a oak dropping acorns versus sitting over a bait plot or corn scattered? Your digging a very large hole for yourself and talking in circles now.


----------



## georgia_home

Remember, no baiting! Even if it's legal, it just isn't right,

You gotta grab the fish by hand, Mr Noodle!!!  (humor intended!!!!

Seriously, if you enjoy hunting, don't stop!!! Just do it your way! Have fun! Don't take it to serious! The peace, on the water or in the woods, is my big thing! Killing something is down the list, not even in the top 3!

And who you are is a guy, a little overly passionate about hunting. Nothing wrong with that. People say the same about me sometimes!



Randy said:


> you have a point.  Who am I to think this sport will always be the sport I love.  Things change.  Times change.  It is sad but it is life.  Some times you just have to give up things when they are no longer something you can enjoy.  You guys enjoy your newly defined sport or what ever you want to call it.  I think I will just go fishing.  Heck I can't eat fried deer meat anymore anyway since the heart attack


----------



## creekrocket

gsubo said:


> GON=kiss of death to good public land hunting and fishing and the most pro baiting mess Ive ever read.
> 
> They've already sent me my three renewal notices..you would have figured they would have gotten the hint by now.



I agree with you.


----------



## brad2727

I can't sleep im loving it so much......I am for hunting over corn on my own property...well its my property! Like I always sat and listened to anti corn hunters say for years...if u don't wanna bait...you can always move to another state and hunt where they don't allow it..I will stand proud and say I will feed em the yeller! And just remember...big mature dominate bucks wont eat corn...so don't use it..


----------



## birddog52

I agree just wait till these corn slingers help us get a dose of that cronic wasting disease and alfax toxic disease in their Turkey population just lazy folks who just want to kill something and not have to learn some woodsmanship on how to hunt Plus some more fuel for the anti hunters


----------



## _BuckMaster_

got to admit this is far much better than any pay for view movie...... South you can bait here/ north you can not bait here.....wow


----------



## glynr329

First of all anyone that say's that hunting over corn or protien pellets is not increasing your advantage of killing a deer is stupid. Now I guess the biggest advantage is going to be who has the best food source at thier bait station. Somone that just goes out in the woods and pours a bag a corn out and hunt it the next day maybe that is going to help you a little. Now the guy that feeds year round great. I hear, oh if you put out a feeder the deer will start eating at night. Isn't that the same thing that happens when you are hunting a big ole white oak with lots of acorns or does it only work with corn? Here is the deal if you say you are wrong it does not help then I guess you are (well you figure that out) because you are doing it why? You are feeding the coons right? Just be honest it is okay.
You wanted this bill to pass to increase your chances of killing a deer. If it did not help you would not care........seriously
I could care less and when it affect where I hunt I have no choice. I am smart enough to know that the guys next door with lots of food will have the deer.


----------



## G Duck

dacdac said:


> can any one tell me where the southern zone ends and the northeren zone begins



At the end of the yellow brick road


----------



## seaweaver

General Lee said:


> Yea,some of the arguments both sides were throwing out sounded like they had been lifted from this forum..........


Really???
where was Jeff Young?

cw


----------



## kmckinnie

The stupid deer will die first! Then the dummy hunter will teach the deer what a feeder is! They learn fast! The whole time I'm still doing fine!Heres a buck at a scrape on his trail!







The club next door had his pics at feeders! I got his pic at the cleaning shed!


----------



## kmckinnie

I've already picked out the next one for this year! And I'm not counting on a feeder to get him! And I ain't scared of the boys tring to get him over a feeder! I'll do my best like I alwats have!
Ol by the way,If the bill passes all the way! Thats fine with me! I just hunt the way I want to hunt! Wish yall the best the way you like!


----------



## JBowers

Echo said:


> Has anyone seen any wording on how this could affect WMA's in the southern zone? If they were open to baiting it would be absurd just trying to find a spot that had not already been baited and claimed by another.


 

As currenty written, this legislation:

1) allows deer & feral hogs to be hunted over bait

2) on private lands only and only with written permission of the landowner

3) prohibits the placing of any feed/bait within 50 yards of any property boundary

4) increases the penalty for any person convicted of illegally hunting big game, other than deer, over bait


----------



## JBowers

270 guy said:


> What skill is there in sitting over a trail or sitting over a oak dropping acorns versus sitting over a bait plot or corn scattered? Your digging a very large hole for yourself and talking in circles now.


 
No skill required for sitting, at least for most folks!

Although, some folks can't identify an oak tree and much less a white oak tree!


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I don't plant either.  Tried it once didn't get the results and didn't like sitting on a food plot waiting on something to walk by.



Food plots are just like corn.....................the biggest mis-conception of all is the deer will come to it like magnets.

If you scout and pattern your deer movement...................you will know *where* to plant / feed.

I have been hunting food plots for 10 yrs now and have no complaints with our results.


----------



## 270 guy

birddog52 said:


> I agree just wait till these corn slingers help us get a dose of that cronic wasting disease and alfax toxic disease in their Turkey population just lazy folks who just want to kill something and not have to learn some woodsmanship on how to hunt Plus some more fuel for the anti hunters



Yeah right! How is this going to cause disease in the turkey anymore then is already there? Some of you people really have no clue .


----------



## 270 guy

kmckinnie said:


> The stupid deer will die first! Then the dummy hunter will teach the deer what a feeder is! They learn fast! The whole time I'm still doing fine!Heres a buck at a scrape on his trail!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The club next door had his pics at feeders! I got his pic at the cleaning shed!



Yep trail cams are as bad or worse of a crutch then corn is. You can time them see which one is coming to what area and set up on the one you want and wait till his time to walk down the trail. It's close to hunting in a pen minus the wire.   

Nice Buck!


----------



## 270 guy

JBowers said:


> No skill required for sitting, at least for most folks!
> 
> Although, some folks can't identify an oak tree and much less a white oak tree!



That's why they have corn now.


----------



## kmckinnie

270 guy said:


> Yep trail cams are as bad or worse of a crutch then corn is. You can time them see which one is coming to what area and set up on the one you want and wait till his time to walk down the trail. It's close to hunting in a pen minus the wire.
> 
> Nice Buck!



I had to find the place to put the t/c in the fenced in area!  O K I'm getting rid of the cam!


----------



## kmckinnie

270 guy said:


> That's why they have corn now.


----------



## General Lee

georgia_home said:


> Do those confuse you also? I chalk them up to "the way things are". For example, if you hunt south and I hunt north, say your in maybe hancock and I am Forsyth county, and assuming I recall correctly hancock is south....
> 
> If we both shoot a deer on January 3, with 243, I am illegal and you ain't.


You would both be illegal.Hancock is in the Northern Zone................


----------



## UYD4L

deermeat270 said:


> I havent read all 470ish posts.  Is anyone talking about hog hunting in the Northern Zone over bait?  How is this enforceable?



Yeah I talked about it with someone for a second before it went back to the baiting debate.

I think you've identified the biggest practical problem with the Bill.  And I think they shouldn't have allowed hog hunting over bait in the north if they weren't going to allow deer hunting over bait.

Someone from Northern SC or who knows of that area said they have the same problem there and the GW's just don't buy it.  If your hunting over bait during deer season be prepared to pay a fine unless make arrangements with the GW to let him know you will be hog hunting and get his approval.

I also suggested that perhaps that was one reason for the increased penalties.  That in the event that they can actually catch you with a dead deer and a blood trail over bait they are going to drop the hammer hoping that people wont try it.

I don't know its a problem for sure.  Maybe they'll take that part out in the Senate.


----------



## georgia_home

GL, that, sure enough, is why i put the disclaimer in the original... about if i was correct vs incorrect on hancock. substitute any south/antler restricted county.

lets say... randolph then... 



General Lee said:


> You would both be illegal.Hancock is in the Northern Zone................





			
				georgia_home said:
			
		

> Do those confuse you also? I chalk them up to "the way things are". For example, if you hunt south and I hunt north, say your in maybe hancock and I am Forsyth county, *and assuming I recall correctly hancock is south....*
> 
> If we both shoot a deer on January 3, with 243, I am illegal and you ain't.


----------



## drhunt20

My only question is...to those of you that are complaining or saying sad day.....How many of you contacted your reps???


----------



## UYD4L

Jeff Phillips said:


> It passed the House, still has a ways to go...



I seem to recall you saying it would never make it out of committee.


----------



## Jerk

HOLY ..........COW..........

Someone mentioned in an earlier post that hunting could be abolished in his lifetime.  

After reading the bickering on this thread, he's probably right.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

drhunt20 said:


> My only question is...to those of you that are complaining or saying sad day.....How many of you contacted your reps???



I think I did.

Not sure though.

Seriously, 6,600 +/- contacted their Reps and the Subcommittee that drafted this bill and the author immediately took the extended season and the northern zone out & made it only with permission of land owner.

Of course he also acted so quickly that he removed the 200 yard clause from the northern zone which would have meant it would be illegal to feed, much less bait.

The surprise on his face and the backpedaling was fun to watch.

Another round of pressure via e-mails, calls and visits yielded the new penalty & 50 from a boundary & a couple of other items.

Though there was not as much activity from hunters as there should've/could've been, there were folks engaged.


----------



## nickel back

drhunt20 said:


> My only question is...to those of you that are complaining or saying sad day.....How many of you contacted your reps???



I did,I contacted all of them not just my rep.I sent out an email to every one of them.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

UYD4L said:


> I seem to recall you saying it would never make it out of committee.



The bill he was talking about doesn't much resemble the one that did make it out of committee.

I'm not sure that once the baiters realize what they have in this bill they are going to much appreciate the thing.


----------



## rex upshaw

buckfiddy said:


> All I have to say about it is...It's about time they listened to what the majority of hunters in the state wanted.



A small sampling is not the majority. They should have asked the wildlife biologist what they thought and gone off their recommendation, if anything. This bill is garbage, and I have zero respect for those who pushed for it, at both the hunter and state level.


----------



## rex upshaw

nickel back said:


> I did,I contacted all of them not just my rep.I sent out an email to every one of them.



I did too.


----------



## G Duck

Quote Mech Dawg:

""the author immediately took the extended season and the northern zone out & made it only with permission of land owner.

Of course he also acted so quickly that he removed the 200 yard clause from the northern zone which would have meant it would be illegal to feed, much less bait.

The surprise on his face and the backpedaling was fun to watch.

Another round of pressure via e-mails, calls and visits yielded the new penalty & 50 from a boundary & a couple of other items.

Though there was not as much activity from hunters as there should've/could've been, there were folks engaged.""



Maybe so, But at the end of the day Jay got what he wanted. He will most likely get baiting approved for the zone he lives and hunts (shoots) in. He is as big, or bigger hunter (or shooter) than most folks on here. So if it passes the Senate, and the Governor Signs it into law, then as I see it he got what he really wanted done.


----------



## GA DAWG

rex upshaw said:


> A small sampling is not the majority. They should have asked the wildlife biologist what they thought and gone off their recommendation, if anything. This bill is garbage, and I have zero respect for those who pushed for it, at both the hunter and state level.


----------



## bhdawgs

I honestly cant believe this passed the senate.  I think its going to give hunters a bad name regardless of your stance on baiting.  The anti's are going to have a field day now.   

And FWIW I am pretty divided on the baiting issue.  I hunt in South GA mainly on agricultural land.  Pouring corn out will not guarantee anything when you have thousand acre soybean or peanut fields next to your property or on your property.


----------



## Handgunner 45-70

Strange thing, I keep hearing about how everything is going to change, Deer are going to be killed by the truck load either by hunters or CWD. Well I guess that what we have is a lot of young hunter that are on this site as they don't rember or don't relize that up intill 1984 it was legal to have corn out all year long and to hunt over it for hogs. People were hunting over the corn durning deer season  and they weren't shooting deer  but hunting hogs. What I am trying to say is that deer were not flocking to the corn, people weren't killing anymore deer because of there being corn out. But the big difference was that the hog population was kind of being kept in check because you injoyed sitting on a bait stand either at night or middle of the day and you had a better chance to see something. No one back then  would say that you were a sorry hunter because  you hunted over corn because that was the normal way to hunt a hog. The big thing is you had a choice back then and now you will have it again. When it was taken away in 84 a lot of older hunters gave up on the sport, because something that was always a right had been taken from them,and they like me didn't understand why? This is a chance for some of us old timers to relive the 70's and 80's over again, when hunting was good, no one worried that ( billy bob) killed a bigger deer than they did and if someone killed a spike people would come around and admire it and the hunter would tell the story of the hunt over and over half the night.  I think everyone needs to rethink the way that they hunt now, Whether its a small doe or a gaint world record it's still a deer and the hunt and the deer need to be charised, because one day it might be all gone. We never know when our last hunt might be and I sure would't want it to be while fussing over who is right and who is wrong. Sorry for rambling on so long but I am again starting to relive the old day when hunting was GOOD.


----------



## UYD4L

Mechanicaldawg said:


> The bill he was talking about doesn't much resemble the one that did make it out of committee.
> 
> I'm not sure that once the baiters realize what they have in this bill they are going to much appreciate the thing.



I don't think a bill had even been introduced when he made that statement.  

I'm just saying, very few, if any of us thought it would get this far.  So I'm going to stop making predictions.

Can you explain some of the short comings that everyone is going to be disappointed with.  Besides the northern hog thing which has been discussed.  

I seem to recall something about an unworkable citation...

And on a side note why did you pull your thread on SB 188 after I posted?  Didn't want everyone knowing what the law in GA is on that subject?


----------



## UYD4L

maker4life said:


> South Georgia is covered in hundreds of thousands of acres of cropland . If you're land is pines or hardwoods and the neighbors have big corn or peanut fields who's baiting then ?
> 
> I'm not really a deer hunter but I know very well down here putting corn out doesn't gurantee a deer like some think . Not when you're competing with the hundred acre soybean field next door .
> 
> I honestly could go either way on it .



This is a good South GA post.  

From my experience running cameras.  Corn/bait ain't all that, and all the deer mostly visit at night.  And I can't think of any bucks over 3.5 that have visited during the day.  I'm not saying it doesn't ever happen.  Ya'll have shown some good pics.  But with the abundance of food sources here, the way big bucks are naturally nocturnal, and the effect that 24/7 feed has, I think at least in my area, baiting isn't going to make much difference.  Maybe if you set a timed feeder that might increase its effectiveness, I haven't really tried that.


----------



## G Duck

bhdawgs said:


> I honestly cant believe this passed the senate.  I think its going to give hunters a bad name regardless of your stance on baiting.  The anti's are going to have a field day now.
> 
> And FWIW I am pretty divided on the baiting issue.  I hunt in South GA mainly on agricultural land.  Pouring corn out will not guarantee anything when you have thousand acre soybean or peanut fields next to your property or on your property.



Did the senate pass it already? did you mean the House?


----------



## elfiii

UYD4L said:


> And on a side note why did you pull your thread on SB 188 after I posted?  Didn't want everyone knowing what the law in GA is in that area?



Because SB 188 was defeated. It is a dead issue.


----------



## G Duck

UYD4L said:


> This is a good South GA post.
> 
> From my experience running cameras.  Corn/bait ain't all that, and all the deer mostly visit at night.  And I can't think of any bucks over 3.5 that have visited during the day.  I'm not saying it doesn't ever happen.  Ya'll have shown some good pics.  But with the abundance of food sources here, the way big bucks are naturally nocturnal, and the effect that 24/7 feed has, I think at least in my area, baiting isn't going to make much difference.  Maybe if you set a timed feeder that might increase its effectiveness, I haven't really tried that.




It is a good Southwest GA post, The nearest major agriculture from the coast is probably a 75-100 miles west.  But other than that I agree.


----------



## G Duck

maker4life said:


> South Georgia is covered in hundreds of thousands of acres of cropland . If you're land is pines or hardwoods and the neighbors have big corn or peanut fields who's baiting then ?
> 
> I'm not really a deer hunter but I know very well down here putting corn out doesn't gurantee a deer like some think . Not when you're competing with the hundred acre soybean field next door .
> 
> I honestly could go either way on it .



Agree, but not Southeast Ga.


----------



## rex upshaw

Handgunner 45-70 said:


> Strange thing, I keep hearing about how everything is going to change, Deer are going to be killed by the truck load either by hunters or CWD. Well I guess that what we have is a lot of young hunter that are on this site as they don't rember or don't relize that up intill 1984 it was legal to have corn out all year long and to hunt over it for hogs. People were hunting over the corn durning deer season  and they weren't shooting deer  but hunting hogs. What I am trying to say is that deer were not flocking to the corn, people weren't killing anymore deer because of there being corn out. But the big difference was that the hog population was kind of being kept in check because you injoyed sitting on a bait stand either at night or middle of the day and you had a better chance to see something. No one back then  would say that you were a sorry hunter because  you hunted over corn because that was the normal way to hunt a hog. The big thing is you had a choice back then and now you will have it again. When it was taken away in 84 a lot of older hunters gave up on the sport, because something that was always a right had been taken from them,and they like me didn't understand why? This is a chance for some of us old timers to relive the 70's and 80's over again, when hunting was good, no one worried that ( billy bob) killed a bigger deer than they did and if someone killed a spike people would come around and admire it and the hunter would tell the story of the hunt over and over half the night.  I think everyone needs to rethink the way that they hunt now, Whether its a small doe or a gaint world record it's still a deer and the hunt and the deer need to be charised, because one day it might be all gone. We never know when our last hunt might be and I sure would't want it to be while fussing over who is right and who is wrong. Sorry for rambling on so long but I am again starting to relive the old day when hunting was GOOD.



deer numbers were much lower back then too.  what was it, 2 bucks and a doe is what you were allowed and there were set doe days.  i still know many folks who will not shoot a doe, because they remember the times when deer were seldom seen.  i hope we aren't headed back down that path.

i think nic said it best a while back (pre-baiting), when he said,  "THESE, are the good ole days".  i think he was right, but it appears that chapter is closing.


----------



## UYD4L

elfiii said:


> Because SB 188 was defeated. It is a dead issue.



The Bill is dead but issues that were being discussed in the threads on it are not dead, because no one was discussing what the Bill actually was trying to do, they were all just discussing high fence hunting.  

With that said, I thought he pulled it.  If a mod pulled it thats a different story.  I have no problem with ya'll's decisions.  Ya'll have had a tough job lately.


----------



## UYD4L

G Duck said:


> Agree, but not Southeast Ga.



True.  But I think the same is true pretty much anywhere where you have a bunch of food plots, oaks, and natural forage.  Its the piney wood timber land where baiting might work the best.


----------



## Jeff Phillips

Randy said:


> Oh I realize those who do not see the difference never will.  It is the same with those who see baiting as hunting.  If one truely does not understand the difference well .....



I agree Randy! Pretty sad ...


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

It is not about the baiters getting what they want. It is about winning at all costs and that means making deals with the liberal legislative black caucus. The same tactic used in 2003 when they changed the law by adding the 200 yard & out of sight langauge. Funding to MARTA in exchange for a yes vote for baiting.

Georgia baiting proponents gave MARTA hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funds to get a 200 yard & out of sight descriptive langauge in the baiting law. Incredibly ironic in my opinion.


----------



## DCOMP54

*A twist to the bill*

Well, if this does pass at all, it could all be for naught if they start a fall Turkey season to mirror deer season. Then you can't dump corn,bait,whatever. 
I think we should press for a fall season just to stop this. Money is the game here and certain ones have pushed this. Check the backers and the Money trail. Which will never happen. 
I personally don't want this to pass and really don't belileve in it at all. Takes away the actual (REAL) experience of hunting. Which none of the politicians understand and never will.
To each his own, tho!


----------



## elfiii

UYD4L said:


> The Bill is dead but issues that were being discussed in the threads on it are not dead, because no one was discussing what the Bill actually was trying to do, they were all just discussing high fence hunting.
> 
> With that said, I thought he pulled it.  If a mod pulled it thats a different story.  I have no problem with ya'll's decisions.  Ya'll have had a tough job lately.



The bill had two purposes:

1. Allow the importation and "farming" of cervids and other exotic game animals.

2. Allow commercial high fence hunting operations.

We didn't pull the thread. MD deleted it himself.

From an esoteric debate point ya'll can keep at it. From a legal standpoint the issue is dead.

I have no doubts the commercial hunting lobby will try again next session. If the Senate kills the baiting bill I have no doubts that one will be back too.

Regardless of the legislative outcome of either, all of those topics will continue to be cussed, fussed, and discussed on here. They always have, they always will.


----------



## rex upshaw

Jeff Phillips said:


> I agree Randy! Pretty sad ...



very sad.


----------



## UYD4L

elfiii said:


> The bill had two purposes:
> 
> 1. Allow the importation and "farming" of cervids and other exotic game animals.
> 
> 2. Allow commercial high fence hunting operations.
> 
> We didn't pull the thread. MD deleted it himself.
> 
> From an esoteric debate point ya'll can keep at it. From a legal standpoint the issue is dead.
> 
> I have no doubts the commercial hunting lobby will try again next session. If the Senate kills the baiting bill I have no doubts that one will be back too.
> 
> Regardless of the legislative outcome of either, all of those topics will continue to be cussed, fussed, and discussed on here. They always have, they always will.



Well my point on the issue is from a hunting ethics point of view all it was changing was allowing people to "hunt" exotics in a high fence.  

Assuming you are in compliance with the relevant regulations, under the current GA law you can "hunt" whitetails in a high fence. And you can sell commercial high fence whitetail "hunts" in GA.  You just can't hunt or sell hunts of exotic species.  

I didn't realize that until recently and I don't think many others did either.  Everyone was arguing about the ethical implications of the Bill but really it wasn't changing much, if anything, in that regard.


----------



## rex upshaw

the wussification of america is in full force.

i'm sick of the talk about wanting kids to see deer every time they step in the woods.  you know what, if they don't see deer every time they sit in the woods, they will have a greater appreciation for when they do.  don't feed me this garbage about them losing focus, we all seemed to have done just fine without sitting over bait piles and not seeing deer every hunt.  don't tell me about all their video games, if you're a parent, you can control how much time they spend playing a video game, how much time they spend in front of the television and how much time they spend outside.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Maybe you need to re-read the conclusion.  It was pretty clear to me that they stated that the data they gathered actually showed that baiting did not decrease hunter effort.  That conclusion directly contradicts your much earlier statement that baiting makes hunting easier (which you have now changed to baiting may make hunting easier in the short term but may make it harder in the long run).



I don't need to re-read the conclusion.  The study was obviously done because the proponents of baiting in SC were claiming that if they allowed killing over bait in the rest of the state it would stop the growth of the deer herd there or even decrease it (this being viewed as a positive result apparently).  Their study showed that hunter effort in the Coastal Plain where it has apparently been widespread for many years is higher per deer harvested than in the Piedmont where it is illegal and they concluded that baiting wasn't going to be the solution to their problem of a deer herd that is either too large or growing to fast, etc.



UYD4L said:


> If you feel that the study was lacking in some ways or that they meant to limit that conclusion to a certain area of SC then that just supports my point that you shouldn't use the study to advance your arguments here in GA.  But even if that is your position (that their conclusion was speaking to a certain area and certain factors) that "limited" conclusion would still directly contradict your general statement that baiting makes hunting easier.  Which is all I've ever said.



I don't feel that the study was lacking but it isn't "all telling" either.  The study was limited in some ways as any study would be.  They got the answer they were looking for for their problem (overpopulation) and I am relatively confident that they got it right.  It doesn't tell us what the hunter effort was in the Coastal Plain before they introduced baiting (again, it sounds to me as if the SC DNR has never had the authority to control baiting in the Coastal Plain, so I assume it has been going on there for a looooong time).  If they did have that data, that would be an even better "control" than the hunter effort in the Piedmont with no baiting, but they didn't and they couldn't, it isn't their fault and it doesn't dismiss everything that they did, it just leaves unanswered questions.

Also, I think YOU are trying to generalize to say or imply that the study tells us something about the success rate of INDIVIDUAL HUNTERS who bait.  It does not.  It isn't a deficiency of the study, it simply wasn't their purpose and they don't draw any conclusions for the individual hunter.  As I pointed out before, they don't have any data on the individual success rate of hunters within that area who hunt over bait vs. those who do not.  Again, that wasn't their purpose.  Maybe they would have found that hunter success was higher for those who baited than for those who didn't even though hunter success was still lower for the whole region than it was in the Piedmont where there is no legalized baiting.  Maybe they would have found that hunter success was higher in the CP for those hunters who DID NOT bait because those hunters weren't depending on bait (and maybe they were putting in more "effort" other than just time on the stand, and maybe they were just better hunters on average) as the study did indicate that hunter dependence on bait was one of the factors that all worked together to limit hunter success.  I don't know what it would have shown.  It wasn't in the scope of the survey and it wasn't their purpose.  To point out that they didn't tell us the results of baiters vs. non-baiters is not a criticism of the study, it just points out that it doesn't tell us everything that there is to know, and again, that wasn't their purpose.

To me, when you say "baiting doesn't make it easier" you are talking about the individual hunter who hunts over bait vs. the individual hunter who does not bait.  At least that is what I would think of if someone asked "does baiting deer make it easier to kill them?"  To me, the question answered by the survey (to the best of their ability since their control wasn't exactly like the study area in all other regards and since we don't have historical data) would be something like "how do the the AVERAGE hunter success rates in an AREA with WIDESPREAD LONG TERM BAITING compare to AVERAGE hunter success rates in an AREA without widespread baiting?"

You don't seem to be able to grasp (or maybe you just don't want to) that the implication for the INDIVIDUAL (especially short term) could very well be different than the implication for the REGION (especially long term).  If you and your neighbor have two pieces of land that are similar in every way, but your neighbor begins baiting this year and you do not, I would bet that your neighbor would see more deer and have the opportunity to shoot more deer per hour on stand than you would.  That is NOT saying that I don't believe the results of the study, which was basically to say that if everyone baits then eventually everyone suffers because the deer don't move about in search for food, become nocturnal and hunters rely on bait too much (and therefore it isn't a good tool for bringing the growing deer herd into check).  That was it in a nutshell.  Don't make it out to be something that it wasn't.


----------



## rex upshaw

how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?

for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.  

how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?


----------



## Randy

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.
> 
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?


From my late night post last night:

"you have a point. Who am I to think this sport will always be the sport I love. Things change. Times change. It is sad but it is life. Some times you just have to give up things when they are no longer something you can enjoy. You guys enjoy your newly defined sport or what ever you want to call it. I think I will just go fishing. Heck I can't eat fried deer meat anymore anyway since the heart attack." 

And as far any subscription to GON, I dropped mine way back when the editor started his aggenda to get baiting allowed and his anti-GWF and anti-WRD rants.


----------



## Jeff Phillips

270 guy said:


> Not everyone uses feeders most folks I know sling it on the ground and scatter it so it doesn't sour. That is the exact same thing as a bait plot they both draw deer in for a kill shot  and nothing more. Most all property in GA has plenty of habitat for the game. Talk until your blue in the face your never going to change the fact they are both the same no matter how hard one is verses the other. Planted or scattered they both feed deer and attract them to the property they are being used on.



The sun and a spotlight both provide light to shoot by, there is no difference between the two. Is that where your arguement goes next?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> So what do make of all your fair chase, ethics, morals, etc. arguments against baiting now that you are saying in the long run baiting might actually make hunting harder?



I still think that baiting deer crosses a "fair chase" line that I'm not willing to cross and that baiting deer is a less ethical way of hunting than other methods of hunting deer, whether that be still hunting, hunting natural food sources, scrape lines, or yes, even hunting over food plots, especially large agricultural fields.  It may be more "fair chase" than hunting them in an enclosure (depending upon the size), but in the spectrum of possible hunting scenarios/techniques I would say that it is not fair chase and not ethical.

The idea that long term widespread baiting may very likely have a negative effect on average hunter success rates within the region would be an example of unintended consequences if the pro-baiters get their way.  It doesn't change that it isn't fair chase or the ethics of it, it just shows unintended consequences of the widespread practice of something that people shouldn't be doing in the first place.  It is just another reason to want to keep hunting over bait illegal IMO.  Just because doing something that is wrong has unintended consequences doesn't mean it isn't still wrong.


----------



## GA DAWG

I think you should have to be a GON subscriber to post here anyhow..


----------



## groundhawg

DCOMP54 said:


> Well, if this does pass at all, it could all be for naught if they start a fall Turkey season to mirror deer season. Then you can't dump corn,bait,whatever.
> I think we should press for a fall season just to stop this. Money is the game here and certain ones have pushed this. Check the backers and the Money trail. Which will never happen.
> I personally don't want this to pass and really don't belileve in it at all. Takes away the actual (REAL) experience of hunting. Which none of the politicians understand and never will.
> To each his own, tho!



Would not matter to some as we do not have any turkeys, thus no turkey hunting.


----------



## rex upshaw

Randy said:


> From my late night post last night:
> 
> "you have a point. Who am I to think this sport will always be the sport I love. Things change. Times change. It is sad but it is life. Some times you just have to give up things when they are no longer something you can enjoy. You guys enjoy your newly defined sport or what ever you want to call it. I think I will just go fishing. Heck I can't eat fried deer meat anymore anyway since the heart attack."
> 
> And as far any subscription to GON, I dropped mine way back when the editor started his aggenda to get baiting allowed and his anti-GWF and anti-WRD rants.



makes sense to me, although i am not going to stop hunting.  i'd rather not associate myself with those i see as the problem and i don't see much that have in common, with many that seem to visit the deer hunting forum these days.  what i value and take pride in, are not the same as many on here.  i will teach my children the way to hunt, just as i was brought up hunting.


----------



## groundhawg

Mechanicaldawg said:


> It is not about the baiters getting what they want. It is about winning at all costs and that means making deals with the liberal legislative black caucus. The same tactic used in 2003 when they changed the law by adding the 200 yard & out of sight langauge. Funding to MARTA in exchange for a yes vote for baiting.
> 
> Georgia baiting proponents gave MARTA hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer funds to get a 200 yard & out of sight descriptive langauge in the baiting law. Incredibly ironic in my opinion.



Where's the beef? - show the prove.......


----------



## rex upshaw

GA DAWG said:


> I think you should have to be a GON subscriber to post here anyhow..



the numbers would be greatly reduced, that's for sure.


----------



## rex upshaw

Catdaddy SC said:


> Is it any different than using a turkey decoy to ambush one?
> 
> How about a duckhunter using spinning wing decoys?
> 
> 
> From my stand point, all three are the same. You are letting some manmade activity do all the work for you. No calling needed, they just simply fly/strutt right in.



i don't use any of what you mentioned and yes, a decoy is different than a food source.  seldom do you see deer hang up from a feed pile, or run away from it.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

HuntinDawg89 said:


> I still think that baiting deer crosses a "fair chase" line that I'm not willing to cross and that baiting deer is a less ethical way of hunting than other methods of hunting deer, whether that be still hunting, hunting natural food sources, scrape lines, or yes, even hunting over food plots, especially large agricultural fields.  It may be more "fair chase" than hunting them in an enclosure (depending upon the size), but in the spectrum of possible hunting scenarios/techniques I would say that it is not fair chase and not ethical.



Is it any different than using a turkey decoy to ambush one?

How about a duckhunter using spinning wing decoys?


From my stand point, all three are the same. You are letting some manmade activity do all the work for you. No calling needed, they just simply fly/strutt right in.


----------



## rex upshaw

Catdaddy SC said:


> How so?
> 
> You can put one out and sit back and wait.



animals have to eat to survive.  how many times have you hunted with a grunt call, or placed a decoy out and had the animal pay little or no attention to it.  the animal's mood is often going to dictate whether or not there is going to be an interaction between the two, where a deer has to eat every couple of hours.


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> ......
> 
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?



i may actually get a subscription now.... ive never even looked in a GON, but i am seriously considering showing my support and appreciation by getting a subscription.

Thanks to all of the folks who are involved with this attempt to make baiting legal. 

just because we have freedom of speech, doesnt mean you HAVE to use it.

just because we have the right to bear arms doesnt mean you HAVE to.

just because your car is capable of going 100 mph doesnt mean you HAVE to.

just because your gun is capable of holding 10 rounds doesnt mean you HAVE to put 10 in it.

just because we can legally bait (hopefully), doesnt mean you HAVE to bait.


----------



## georgiabow

Catdaddy SC said:


> Is it any different than using a turkey decoy to ambush one?
> 
> How about a duckhunter using spinning wing decoys?
> 
> 
> From my stand point, all three are the same. You are letting some manmade activity do all the work for you. No calling needed, they just simply fly/strutt right in.


now,  you know thats WAY too much logic for a thread like this.......


----------



## georgiabow

HuntinDawg89 said:


> in the spectrum of possible hunting scenarios/techniques I would say that it is not fair chase and not ethical.



fortunately, we are all entitled to our opinions. 

my personal opinion is that using a gun or bow isnt FAIR chase, but i still do it. 

i also dont consider using bait for fishing as FAIR or ethical, but i do that too.

oh well, aminals taste good.


----------



## simpleman30

now that the state is going to allow another form of bait in addition to food plots and attractant scents, maybe the mods will help cull the number of anti-baiting threads.


----------



## UYD4L

Again, I think you are off track on how this all got started.  I would like to go back and point out all your bouncing around but there is too much. Here is one great example of what I'm talking about.  At one point you use the SC to support your view in a discussion with BONEHEAD.  Then not five minutes later you start discounting the study with me:



HuntinDawg89 said:


> Also, the implications of the study in SC indicate that the hunting conditions in the overall area where baiting is legal may suffer (fatter deer who move less in general and less in daylight??) so no, I'll not be changing my mind.





HuntinDawg89 said:


> 1) They were very careful to repeatedly state that their conclusion applied to the coastal plain of SC.  There are potentially many other factors at work.
> 
> 2) They cited other studies that indicated that hunter success was elevated with baiting.  Why should we ignore those studies and not this one?



Of course suggesting the study should be ignored wasn't discounting it.  You just meant it wasn't all telling.



HuntinDawg89 said:


> I don't need to re-read the conclusion.
> 
> Also, I think YOU are trying to generalize to say or imply that the study tells us something about the success rate of INDIVIDUAL HUNTERS who bait.  It does not.
> 
> You don't seem to be able to grasp (or maybe you just don't want to) that the implication for the INDIVIDUAL (especially short term) could very well be different than the implication for the REGION (especially long term).  If you and your neighbor have two pieces of land that are similar in every way, but your neighbor begins baiting this year and you do not, I would bet that your neighbor would see more deer and have the opportunity to shoot more deer per hour on stand than you would.  That is NOT saying that I don't believe the results of the study, which was basically to say that if everyone baits then eventually everyone suffers because the deer don't move about in search for food, become nocturnal and hunters rely on bait too much (and therefore it isn't a good tool for bringing the growing deer herd into check).  That was it in a nutshell.  Don't make it out to be something that it wasn't.



Here's an a couple lines straight from the conclusion:

"Proponents of baiting often claim that baiting decreases hunter effort and increases deer harvest rates that will solve problems associated with abundant deer populations. Though counterintuitive for some observers, data from this study suggest a negative, rather than a positive, relationship between baiting and deer harvest rates and hunter effort at the regional level in South Carolina."

That's plain English to me.  Hunter effort and success had negative relationships to baiting.  

Again if thats because the study doesn't apply (SC, doesn't answer all your questions, etc) then why are you using its findings to support your cause?

You want to act like your short-term, long-term and individual vs. everyone arguments are some great epiphanies that I can't understand, but actually they're anecdotal, contradictory, and make no difference as to our overall discussion. 

How are individual hunter experiences supposed to be positive when you claim in the long run they will be hunting fat deer that move mostly at night?

Even if you're right about those hypothesis what does that mean about what all else you've said.  You didn't answer my question about how this would effect your ethical considerations. 

You repeatedly made fair chase ethics arguments.  Were these arguments based largely on individual and short term hunting experiences?  Or were they based on hunting generally?  Are you now saying baiting should be illegal because its unethical for people who people are good at it and for everyone else in the short run.  But its not unethical for people who are bad at it or for anyone in the long run?  But it should still be illegal because after a while it causes deer to go nocturnal?   

To me baiting is either generally unethical and not fair chase because it makes hunting easier or its not because it doesn't make hunting easier than other accepted practices.  You want to make all these distinctions with the study and raise all these unanswered questions.  But when you put all your long drawn out posts together its hard to make sense of it other than you are against baiting.

Here's a simple question.  How bout a simple answer for once.  You are now stating that in the long run "eventually everyone suffers [from baiting] because the deer don't move about in search for food, become nocturnal and hunters rely on bait too much."  Assuming this bill becomes law and that is true, will baiting still be unethical at that time?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

Catdaddy SC said:


> Is it any different than using a turkey decoy to ambush one?
> 
> How about a duckhunter using spinning wing decoys?
> 
> From my stand point, all three are the same. You are letting some manmade activity do all the work for you. No calling needed, they just simply fly/strutt right in.



I don't hunt turkeys and I very rarely use spinning wing decoys for ducks, but yes, I think they are very different.

I haven't had much luck at all with a spinning wing decoy for ducks.  I know that some have, but I haven't.  I've seen ducks react positively to them in Arkansas, but I haven't seen it in Georgia.  Spinning wing decoys flare specklebelly geese.  According to my guide in Arkansas, Specks HATE roboducks.  In my experience, the resident Canada's in Georgia flare off of them too...and since I'm as likely to shoot at a honker as a duck when I'm duck hunting in Georgia, I generally don't use one in Georgia.  I used one ONE time this season after not using one in Georgia for several years.

I don't hunt turkeys although I've done it a few times over the years.  I would say that the use of decoys for turkey hunting is a long standing time honored tradition as is the use of decoys (not mechanized) for waterfowl.  I don't think that decoys for turkeys (admitting I'm inexperienced with turkeys) or spinning wing decoys for ducks have anything remotely close to the allure of easy, abundant food, especially food on a timer.

Based on your logic, aren't regular decoys for waterfowl "letting some manmade activity do all the work for you" as well?  How about regular decoys on a jerk rig?

I've been told that in parts of Canada and the extreme northern US, you can put out a couple of spinning wing duck decoys and no other decoys and kill a limit of ducks.  I guess this is because the new ducks born since last season have never seen them and are just beginning their migration and it makes them easy prey to those things and maybe also because the older ducks haven't seen one since the previous season.  By the time they have reached Arkansas or Georgia (places that I hunt) they have seen enough of them that they are pretty wise to them IMO although in a flooded rice field on a sunny day I'm sure they still help get the ducks attention and make them more likely to give your spread a look.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

georgiabow said:


> i also dont consider using bait for fishing as FAIR or ethical, but i do that too.



So you routinely engage in activity that you personally believe to be unethical...wow, that tells me all I need to know.


----------



## gacowboy

groundhawg said:


> How your representative voted
> 
> 2011-2012 Regular Session
> [HB 277]
> 
> 
> House Vote #213 (Shaw AM 25 1245)
> Yea (Y): 146Nay (N): 22Not Voting (-): 10Excused (E): 2
> -
> You might want to delete this. The house vote on the bill was vote #214


----------



## georgiabow

HuntinDawg89 said:


> So you routinely engage in activity that you personally believe to be unethical...wow, that tells me all I need to know.



i guess so. i dont consider it fair to kill a deer with a gun or bow, but i still do it.

i dont consider it fair to trick a fish with a rubber grub on a hook, but i do it.



i mostly consume only meat i kill, unless i take my family out to a restaraunt on a special occasion, or i decide i want crab lega or hotwings for dinner. other than that, its only stuff i kill. it cant stand the thought of that disgusting genetically altered, steroid pumped garbage they sell at the grocery store. life can be an ugly thing, and the world isnt fair. therefore, sometimes i have to do things i dont necessarily agree with. 

maybe you think the whole world is just peaches and cream......


----------



## Michael Lee

I've tried not to chime in on this subject, as this bill will not effect on how I hunt personally.  I see both sides of the fence and the question I have is are there any issues that have been directly linked to hunting over bait other than CWD (which the origin of is still unclear) in some states?

Baiting Allowed in entire states of: 
Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, New Hampshire, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, Washington

Baiting Allowed in Selective areas of: 
Connecticut, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, Wisconsin

I've hunted Kansas, Ohio, South Carolina, Florida, Kentucky, Texas, and Wisconsin from these lists and have a lot of knowledge on how baiting is done in these states.

The public perception in these states are not negative at all as far as hunting over bait.  In the states I've hunted, it actually is not needed to shoot a deer.


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> A small sampling is not the majority...................



But, but, but I was told on here by an anti baiter that I have learned to respect a great deal, during a debate about this very subject of sampling hunters _you can taste a spoonful of soup to see if the pot needs salt _


----------



## Catdaddy SC

HuntinDawg89 said:


> Based on your logic, aren't regular decoys for waterfowl "letting some manmade activity do all the work for you" as well?  How about regular decoys on a jerk rig?




Yep, definetly.

The purist just kick the water and call. 



Not saying I'm a purist, but have done it everyway possible........but that seems to be the common denominator in alot of the fair chase arguments on baiting.......no homework,no scouting,no skill,etec.

The same can be said for turkey hunting with decoys, especially in the pm on fields/pastures.


----------



## JBowers

GA DAWG said:


> I think you should have to be a GON subscriber to post here anyhow..


 

I agree.  It would improve the average IQ both ways!


----------



## Twenty five ought six

groundhawg said:


> How your representative voted
> 
> 2011-2012 Regular Session
> [HB 277]
> 
> 
> House Vote #213 (Shaw AM 25 1245)
> Yea (Y): 146Nay (N): 22Not Voting (-): 10Excused (E): 2




That's not the vote tally for HB 277.

It may be the tally on the floor amendment that was offered, but it's not the final vote.


----------



## CamoCop

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.
> 
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?



food plots aren't "native vegetation", neither is standing corn, soybean field, pea field, peanut field, etc.  about the only "native vegetation" there is is Oak trees.

oh and bye!  don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya....


----------



## Twenty five ought six

Michael Lee said:


> I've tried not to chime in on this subject, as this bill will not effect on how I hunt personally.  I see both sides of the fence and the question I have is are there any issues that have been directly linked to hunting over bait other than CWD (which the origin of is still unclear) in some states?
> 
> Baiting Allowed in entire states of:
> Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Nevada, New Hampshire, Mississippi, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Utah, Washington
> 
> Baiting Allowed in Selective areas of:
> Connecticut, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, Wisconsin
> 
> I've hunted Kansas, Ohio, South Carolina, Florida, Kentucky, Texas, and Wisconsin from these lists and have a lot of knowledge on how baiting is done in these states.
> 
> The public perception in these states are not negative at all as far as hunting over bait.  In the states I've hunted, it actually is not needed to shoot a deer.



You list of a states is not correct.


----------



## CamoCop

Catdaddy SC said:


> Yep, definetly.
> 
> The purist just kick the water and call.
> 
> 
> 
> Not saying I'm a purist, but have done it everyway possible........but that seems to be the common denominator in alot of the fair chase arguments on baiting.......no homework,no scouting,no skill,etec.
> 
> The same can be said for turkey hunting with decoys, especially in the pm on fields/pastures.



what about the bear hunters in Canada?  are those not fair chase kills because bait was used as a lure?  i guess all those hunters and B&C record holders for bears were all "slob hunters" with no skill...these anti-baiters crack me up!


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> I still think that baiting deer crosses a "fair chase" line that I'm not willing to cross and that baiting deer is a less ethical way of hunting than other methods of hunting deer, whether that be still hunting, hunting natural food sources, scrape lines, or yes, even hunting over food plots, especially large agricultural fields.  It may be more "fair chase" than hunting them in an enclosure (depending upon the size), but in the spectrum of possible hunting scenarios/techniques I would say that it is not fair chase and not ethical.



Based on what?  What is unfair not ethical about it?


----------



## HuntinDawg89

UYD4L said:


> Of course suggesting the study should be ignored wasn't discounting it.  You just meant it wasn't all telling.



I didn't say the SC study should be ignored.  I pointed out that the other poster was ignoring the other studies that the SC study referenced (some of which showed different results) and was asking the rhetorical question, why should we throw those studies out and not this one?  That does NOT equate to saying that this study is invalid or should be thrown out.



UYD4L said:


> You didn't answer my question about how this would effect your ethical considerations.



By the time you posted this I had already answered your question as follows, so I was not dodging your question:



HuntinDawg89 said:


> I still think that baiting deer crosses a "fair chase" line that I'm not willing to cross and that baiting deer is a less ethical way of hunting than other methods of hunting deer, whether that be still hunting, hunting natural food sources, scrape lines, or yes, even hunting over food plots, especially large agricultural fields.  It may be more "fair chase" than hunting them in an enclosure (depending upon the size), but in the spectrum of possible hunting scenarios/techniques I would say that it is not fair chase and not ethical.
> 
> The idea that long term widespread baiting may very likely have a negative effect on average hunter success rates within the region would be an example of unintended consequences if the pro-baiters get their way.  It doesn't change that it isn't fair chase or the ethics of it, it just shows unintended consequences of the widespread practice of something that people shouldn't be doing in the first place.  It is just another reason to want to keep hunting over bait illegal IMO.  Just because doing something that is wrong has unintended consequences doesn't mean it isn't still wrong.


 



UYD4L said:


> You repeatedly made fair chase ethics arguments.  Were these arguments based largely on individual and short term hunting experiences?  Or were they based on hunting generally?  Are you now saying baiting should be illegal because its unethical for people who people are good at it and for everyone else in the short run.  But its not unethical for people who are bad at it or for anyone in the long run?  But it should still be illegal because after a while it causes deer to go nocturnal?



Now these questions are really inane.  I believe that hunting deer over bait is unethical and is not fair chase.  I've made that clear.  Someone's ability to do it with their desired results do not affect the nature of the activity.  If I'm 250 yards from an idiot over a bait pile and I kill a deer eating white oak acorns under a white oak tree and the idiot over the bait pile doesn't see any deer because they were all eating natural food sources or because he didn't use the wind and they smelled him or because he was eating candy bars and farting the Auburn fight song, or, or, or, or, or, it doesn't matter, it is not fair chase and it is not ethical.  His ability to do an effective job at his unethical activity doesn't change the fact that it is unethical.  If a study showed that hunter effort was greater per deer killed by driving the roads at night with a spotlight and shooting deer at night from the road with a light on other peoples property that would not make me conclude that since hunter effort was greater and success was lower that it must then be a fair chase method and therefore ethical.  Your questions have become so preposterous that I must counter with absurd examples.



UYD4L said:


> Here's a simple question.  How bout a simple answer for once.  You are now stating that in the long run "eventually everyone suffers [from baiting] because the deer don't move about in search for food, become nocturnal and hunters rely on bait too much."  Assuming this bill becomes law and that is true, will baiting still be unethical at that time?



I'm sure this won't be as simple of an answer as you'd like but I'll give it a shot.  There are more than one factor in determining what makes something unethical.  One of those factors is whether it is illegal.  If you have to break the law to do something then unless we are talking about some kind of civil disobedience based on high principle (think Boston Tea party or Revolutionary War type events or think Rosa Parks refusing to sit in the back of the bus), which we clearly aren't, then the simple fact that something is illegal makes it unethical.  So in that sense if killing over bait becomes legal in the SZ then it also becomes somewhat less unethical in the SZ as well.  Right now it isn't even a matter of opinion whether killing over bait (hunting within 200 yards or line of sight) in Georgia is unethical because it is illegal and thereby unethical by definition.  Once it is a legal activity it will be a matter of opinion, a matter of personal values whether it is unethical or not.  Whether it is fair chase or not will not change.  My OPINION on whether it is unethical will not change.  In my opinion it will still be unethical and it will still not be fair chase, so that is the simple answer you were looking for I guess.  But I will not come on here and slam someone in the SZ for doing it within the SZ because they will be engaging in a legal activity at that point and I don't think hunters need to publicly criticize other hunters for engaging in legal hunting activity as it is just ammo for the anti's at that point and divisive of legal hunters.  I don't think that precludes me from railing against it when it is being considered for legality though.

BTW, you have yourself quoted the study and also made statements to the effect that you think there are other factors which determine the effectiveness of baiting in certain areas.  You stated that it is more likely to be effective in a pine forest than near a large agricultural field and I agree, but you yourself are both citing the study and also citing other factors that could affect the conclusion that you keep alleging.

At this point it seems that you are just arguing for the sake of it.  You want to talk about the origin of the discussion or some other perceived inconsistency rather than honing in on what we do or do not agree on specifically and having a good debate about those things.


----------



## CamoCop

HuntinDawg89 said:


> But I will not come on here and slam someone in the SZ for doing it within the SZ because they will be engaging in a legal activity at that point and I don't think hunters need to publicly criticize other hunters for engaging in legal hunting activity as it is just ammo for the anti's at that point and divisive of legal hunters.



oh really, then explain your Sig line????  the attitude reflected in your sig line reminds me of the people on the 11 o'clock news with no teeth describing the sound of the tornado that just ripped through their trailer.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

CamoCop said:


> what about the bear hunters in Canada?  are those not fair chase kills because bait was used as a lure?  i guess all those hunters and B&C record holders for bears were all "slob hunters" with no skill...these anti-baiters crack me up!




I'm ok with all of it if it's legal. I'm not one of the purist.


Just thinking alot of folks that live in glass houses shouldn't be throwing stones.


----------



## HuntinDawg89

georgiabow said:


> i guess so. i dont consider it fair to kill a deer with a gun or bow, but i still do it.
> 
> i dont consider it fair to trick a fish with a rubber grub on a hook, but i do it.
> 
> 
> 
> i mostly consume only meat i kill, unless i take my family out to a restaraunt on a special occasion, or i decide i want crab lega or hotwings for dinner. other than that, its only stuff i kill. it cant stand the thought of that disgusting genetically altered, steroid pumped garbage they sell at the grocery store. life can be an ugly thing, and the world isnt fair. therefore, sometimes i have to do things i dont necessarily agree with.
> 
> maybe you think the whole world is just peaches and cream......



I don't consider fishing with bait to be unethical, but you stated that you do and that you do it anyway.  I engage in the same behavior (fishing with bait) but if I considered it unethical (as you've said you do) then I wouldn't do it.

It isn't every day that you read someone saying that they routinely engage in activities that they personally believe are unethical.  That is all I'm saying.


----------



## georgiabow

HuntinDawg89 said:


> I don't consider fishing with bait to be unethical, but you stated that you do and that you do it anyway.  I engage in the same behavior (fishing with bait) but if I considered it unethical (as you've said you do) then I wouldn't do it.
> 
> It isn't every day that you read someone saying that they routinely engage in activities that they personally believe are unethical.  That is all I'm saying.



you are trying to turn my post into something its not. lighten up francis.....


----------



## HuntinDawg89

CamoCop said:


> oh really, then explain your Sig line????  the attitude reflected in your sig line reminds me of the people on the 11 o'clock news with no teeth describing the sound of the tornado that just ripped through their trailer.



First of all, my sig line is not slamming a legal activity in Georgia (yet).

I would be glad to discuss all the many reasons why hunting over a food plot or agricultural field is not the same as hunting over a feeder, but in the past when I tried to engage in that discussion the thread was locked.

I do not want to be the reason for this thread to be locked or deleted.

I wrote my sig line because I am tired of unethical slob poachers justifying their illegal baiting as some kind of poor man's food plot.  It is an absurd argument on their part and one I'm glad to refute, but not on this thread for fear of getting it nuked.

I will be glad to debate it with you by PM or on another thread if you wish to start one.  If you want to start a thread on the discussion of whether hunting over bait is the same as hunting over an agricultural field or food plot, please direct me to that thread by PM and I will be happy to debate it there.  I won't be back online for several hours at least, but I'll debate it with you when I get back if you want to do it by PM or on another thread.  I look forward to it.

BTW, the "food plots" I have hunted over have almost always been large agricultural fields and I haven't even done that in many years because we no longer plant our fields for the cattle.


----------



## UYD4L

HuntinDawg89 said:


> I didn't say the SC study should be ignored.
> 
> Now these questions are really inane.  Your questions have become so preposterous that I must counter with absurd examples.
> 
> I'm sure this won't be as simple of an answer as you'd like but I'll give it a shot.
> 
> BTW, you have yourself quoted the study and also made statements to the effect that you think there are other factors which determine the effectiveness of baiting in certain areas.
> 
> At this point it seems that you are just arguing for the sake of it.  You want to talk about the origin of the discussion or some other perceived inconsistency rather than honing in on what we do or do not agree on specifically and having a good debate about those things.



I edited your post to shorten it.  

First, I think in the context of the entire post and previous and subsequent posts, it was clear that you were trying to use the study for your purpose while almost simultaneously qualifying and discounting it.

Second, those questions were meant to be absurd so as to shed light on the absurdity of the positions you have taken in this discussion.  I was hoping that maybe you could explain your underlying logic that I was missing not take them literally and respond with absurd hypotheticals.  But surely you don't believe the results of the study were caused by candy bars and flatulence.

And again you remain off track.  I have not cited the study to support my position on baiting.  As stated I don't even really have a position on baiting.  I agree with some of the anti's positions and some of the pro's.  All I have ever cited the study for is to show your contradictory use of it.  That is the primary thing that we disagree about.  

However, I was getting at some more substantial differences in our ideology as I made those preposterous questions and then asked for my final "simple" question.

If you want to continue along that line.  You can answer my question about what makes baiting unethical.  (you probably already have. Is there any way we can merge this into one discussion?)


----------



## rex upshaw

CamoCop said:


> food plots aren't "native vegetation", neither is standing corn, soybean field, pea field, peanut field, etc.  about the only "native vegetation" there is is Oak trees.
> 
> oh and bye!  don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya....



I don't hunt food plots, corn fields etc.


----------



## GA DAWG

We still talking about this?


----------



## CamoCop

i don't bait and never have.  i do however supplemental feed with protein pellets.  i do not hunt over these feed stations though but since i use a feeder to supplemental feed...i get marked as a baiter.  with that being said, it's not my place or anyone elses to say whats ethical or not as long as it is legal.  i don't look down on people who bait, use dogs or anything else as long as it's legal.  the only difference between feeding protein out of a feeder and planting a food plot is the feeder is not effected by weather.  EVERYTIME i ever planted food plots it decided not to rain for 2 months.  i did not have the luxery to watch the weather channel because i lived 6 hours from my lease.  with a feeder i don't worry about weather conditions.  i don't know where the word "lazy" comes from with feeders either.  feeders are much more work to maintain year around then food plots.  after the initial planting of a food plot there is no more work.  feeders have to be serviced and filled year around.  the drawback is from my experience the feeder way is alot more expensive and time consuming.  the way i look at it is, if you hunt over a "bait"plot or ag field you have no right judging someone hunting over a feeder.  "bait"plots and/or ag. fields are not native forage.  the only native forage is acorns....everything else was brought over by Europeans centuries ago.


----------



## kmckinnie

Another push toward 1000, thats all we can hope for! The drivlers are feeling left out!!


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

groundhawg said:


> Where's the beef? - show the prove.......



That is a special order beef that only a select few are privy to. It's just a simple part of our open, transparent governmental process of legislating.

It took two years to discover the mule trade & that investment of effort isn't provided for free!

Hint: Start mapping the vote.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Map:


----------



## groundhawg

Mechanicaldawg said:


> That is a special order beef that only a select few are privy to. It's just a simple part of our open, transparent governmental process of legislating.
> 
> It took two years to discover the mule trade & that investment of effort isn't provided for free!
> 
> Hint: Start mapping the vote.



So there is no prove, just more mudslinging!!!!!!!!


----------



## Marlin_444

OMG... Bait or don't...  Extend the season or shorten it... Bolt or Semi - Auto...  Side lock or Inline...  Compound or Crossbow...  OMG...

Let's go hunting... 

SCREAM A LITTLE and I'll see you in the woods...

Ron


----------



## kmckinnie

If yall Yeas and Neys can't tell your side 6 pages ago,well we all need help! Or yall need help! Which is it! Its a sad day for sure!
Its a sad sad sad sad sad sad day! 

If yall have not noticed the mods and admins are hoping yall will get this out of your system! Yall are letting this get the better of yall!
Yall make one more post and give it your best shot so this place can become normal again!


Final closing arguments please!


----------



## rex upshaw

CamoCop said:


> i don't bait and never have.  i do however supplemental feed with protein pellets.  i do not hunt over these feed stations though but since i use a feeder to supplemental feed...i get marked as a baiter.  with that being said, it's not my place or anyone elses to say whats ethical or not as long as it is legal.  i don't look down on people who bait, use dogs or anything else as long as it's legal.  the only difference between feeding protein out of a feeder and planting a food plot is the feeder is not effected by weather.  EVERYTIME i ever planted food plots it decided not to rain for 2 months.  i did not have the luxery to watch the weather channel because i lived 6 hours from my lease.  with a feeder i don't worry about weather conditions.  i don't know where the word "lazy" comes from with feeders either.  feeders are much more work to maintain year around then food plots.  after the initial planting of a food plot there is no more work.  feeders have to be serviced and filled year around.  the drawback is from my experience the feeder way is alot more expensive and time consuming.  the way i look at it is, if you hunt over a "bait"plot or ag field you have no right judging someone hunting over a feeder.  "bait"plots and/or ag. fields are not native forage.  the only native forage is acorns....everything else was brought over by Europeans centuries ago.



a couple things i don't agree with, but lets start with what's in blue.  

so the only difference in feeders and food plot, is ONLY the weather AND....having the proper soil/ph, time it takes for crop to mature and be available to deer (see brasicas), location where feed can be put (anywhere), how much forage available to the deer (up to the baiter) etc. etc.  weather is a factor, but trying to compare the two are quite different.

example, you find the best area to hunt, littered with deer sign, close to water and bedding, yet there is no way you can get a tractor in there and plant a food plot, not to mention the disturbacne factor.  so what do you do?  lucky you, hb 277 is here to save the day.  just tote your food plot with you (over your shoulder of course) and bring the feed to their backdoor.


----------



## Randy

Blah blahblah.


----------



## kmckinnie

Marlin_444 said:


> OMG... Bait or don't...  Extend the season or shorten it... Bolt or Semi - Auto...  Side lock or Inline...  Compound or Crossbow...  OMG...
> 
> Let's go hunting...
> 
> SCREAM A LITTLE and I'll see you in the woods...
> 
> Ron



Thanks Ron!


----------



## rex upshaw

kmckinnie said:


> If yall Yeas and Neys can't tell your side 6 pages ago,well we all need help! Or yall need help! Which is it! Its a sad day for sure!
> Its a sad sad sad sad sad sad day!
> 
> If yall have not noticed the mods and admins are hoping yall will get this out of your system! Yall are letting this get the better of yall!
> Yall make one more post and give it your best shot so this place can become normal again!
> Final closing arguments please!



normal has been thrown under the bus...


----------



## kmckinnie

Randy said:


> Blah blahblah.



If your finger tips aren't sore I don't know what to say!


----------



## groundhawg

was vote #214 which was yea122 nay48 nv8 exc2 and voters for it are shown below.

2011-2012 Regular Session 
[HB 277]  


House Vote #214 (PASSAGE)
Yea (Y): 122Nay (N): 48Not Voting (-): 8Excused (E): 2
- :ABDUL-SALAAM, 74TH
N :ABRAMS, 84TH
N :ALLISON, 8TH
Y :AMERSON, 9TH
Y :ANDERSON, 117TH
N :ASHE, 56TH
Y :ATWOOD, 179TH
N :AUSTIN, 10TH
Y :BAKER, 78TH
Y :BATTLES, 15TH
Y :BEARDEN, 68TH
N :BEASLEY-TEAGUE, 65TH
N :BELL, 58TH
N :BENFIELD, 85TH
Y :BENTON, 31ST
Y :BLACK, 174TH
Y :BRADDOCK, 19TH
N :BROCKWAY, 101ST
N :BROOKS, 63RD
Y :BRUCE, 64TH
Y :BRYANT, 160TH
Y :BUCKNER, 130TH
Y :BURNS, 157TH
N :BYRD, 20TH
Y :CARTER, 175TH
N :CASAS, 103RD
- :CHANNELL, 116TH
Y :CHEOKAS, 134TH
Y :CLARK, 98TH
Y :CLARK, 104TH
Y :COLEMAN, 97TH
N :COLLINS, 27TH
Y :COOKE, 18TH
Y :COOMER, 14TH
- :COOPER, 41ST
N :CRAWFORD, 16TH
Y AVIS, 109TH
Y AWKINS-HAIGLER, 93RD
Y EMPSEY, 13TH
N ICKERSON, 95TH
Y ICKEY, 136TH
Y ICKSON, 6TH
N OBBS, 53RD
Y OLLAR, 45TH
E RENNER, 86TH
Y UDGEON, 24TH
Y UKES, 150TH
Y UTTON, 166TH
Y :EHRHART, 36TH
Y :ENGLAND, 108TH
Y :EPPS, 128TH
Y :EPPS, 140TH
Y :EVANS, 40TH
Y :FLOYD, 99TH
Y :FLUDD, 66TH
Y :FRANKLIN, 43RD
Y :FRAZIER, 123RD
N :FULLERTON, 151ST
- :GARDNER, 57TH
Y :GEISINGER, 48TH
N :GOLICK, 34TH
Y :GORDON, 162ND
Y :GREENE, 149TH
Y :HAMILTON, 23RD
Y :HANNER, 148TH
Y :HARBIN, 118TH
N :HARDEN, 28TH
Y :HARDEN, 147TH
N :HARRELL, 106TH
Y :HATCHETT, 143RD
Y :HATFIELD, 177TH
Y :HEARD, 114TH
- :HECKSTALL, 62ND
Y :HEMBREE, 67TH
N :HENSON, 87TH
N :HILL, 21ST
N :HOLCOMB, 82ND
Y :HOLMES, 125TH
N :HOLT, 112TH
Y :HORNE, 71ST
Y :HOUSTON, 170TH
Y :HOWARD, 121ST
N :HUCKABY, 113TH
N :HUDSON, 124TH
Y :HUGLEY, 133RD
N :JACKSON, 142ND
N :JACOBS, 80TH
Y :JAMES, 135TH
Y :JASPERSE, 12TH
Y :JERGUSON, 22ND
Y :JOHNSON, 37TH
Y :JONES, 44TH
Y :JONES, 46TH
Y :JORDAN, 77TH
N :KAISER, 59TH
N :KENDRICK, 94TH
Y :KIDD, 141ST
N :KNIGHT, 126TH
Y :LANE, 167TH
Y :LINDSEY, 54TH
Y :LONG, 61ST
Y :LUCAS, 139TH
Y :MADDOX, 127TH
Y :MADDOX, 172ND
Y :MANNING, 32ND
Y :MARIN, 96TH
E :MARTIN, 47TH
Y :MAXWELL, 17TH
Y :MAYO, 91ST
Y :MCBRAYER, 153RD
Y :MCCALL, 30TH
N :MCKILLIP, 115TH
N :MEADOWS, 5TH
Y :MILLS, 25TH
Y :MITCHELL, 88TH
N :MORGAN, 39TH
Y :MORRIS, 155TH
N :MOSBY, 90TH
Y :MURPHY, 120TH
N :NEAL, 1ST
N :NEAL, 75TH
Y :NIMMER, 178TH
Y :NIX, 69TH
Y `NEAL, 146TH
- LIVER, 83RD
Y AK, 102ND
N ARENT, 81ST
Y ARRISH, 156TH
N ARSONS, 42ND
Y EAKE, 137TH
N OWELL, 29TH
Y OWELL, 171ST
Y RUETT, 144TH
Y URCELL, 159TH
- :RALSTON, 7TH
Y :RAMSEY, 72ND
Y :RANDALL, 138TH
N :REECE, 11TH
Y :RICE, 51ST
Y :RILEY, 50TH
Y :ROBERTS, 154TH
Y :ROGERS, 26TH
Y :RYNDERS, 152ND
- :SCOTT, 2ND
Y :SCOTT, 76TH
N :SETZLER, 35TH
Y :SHAW, 176TH
N :SHELDON, 105TH
Y :SIMS, 119TH
Y :SIMS, 169TH
Y :SMITH, 70TH
Y :SMITH, 122ND
Y :SMITH, 129TH
N :SMITH, 131ST
Y :SMITH, 168TH
Y :SMYRE, 132ND
Y :SPENCER, 180TH
Y :STEPHENS, 161ST
Y :STEPHENS, 164TH
N :STEPHENSON, 92ND
Y :TALTON, 145TH
Y :TANKERSLEY, 158TH
Y :TAYLOR, 55TH
Y :TAYLOR, 79TH
Y :TAYLOR, 173RD
Y :TEASLEY, 38TH
N :THOMAS, 100TH
N :TINUBU, 60TH
Y :WALKER, 107TH
Y :WATSON, 163RD
N :WELCH, 110TH
Y :WELDON, 3RD
Y :WILKERSON, 33RD
Y :WILKINSON, 52ND
Y :WILLARD, 49TH
Y :WILLIAMS, 4TH
Y :WILLIAMS, 89TH
Y :WILLIAMS, 165TH
N :WILLIAMSON, 111TH
Y :YATES, 73RD


----------



## georgiabow

kmckinnie said:


> If your finger tips aren't sore I don't know what to say!



aint it......


----------



## JBowers

groundhawg said:


> It was voted on twice - 1st vote on HB277 was #213 yea146 nay 22 nv10 exc2 which I posted as final vote. Final/second vote was vote #214 which was yea122 nay48 nv8 exc2 and voters for it are shown below.
> 
> 2011-2012 Regular Session
> [HB 277]
> 
> 
> House Vote #214 (PASSAGE)
> Yea (Y): 122Nay (N): 48Not Voting (-): 8Excused (E): 2


 

HB 277 was NOT voted on twice!  There was only one vote on HB 277.  Vote #213 was a vote on the SHAW AMENDMENT.  Vote #214 was on the passage of HB 277.


----------



## Randy

georgiabow said:


> aint it......



Yes it is...enough to make a man an anti-hunter.  You asked for last arguments and I gave you mine.  It is as good as any.


----------



## BornToHuntAndFish

Thanks for the map, Mechanicaldawg!


----------



## CamoCop

my final thoughts are...anytime "restrictions" on hunting are loosened or lifted, it is a win for the entire hunting community.  i can't wait for the Northern Zone to follow suite now...


----------



## Smokepoler

My final thoughts..............THANK GOD TURKEY SEASON IS ABOUT TO CRANK UP!!!!!!!!!
LET'S GO KILL 'EM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## LonePine

CamoCop said:


> my final thoughts are...anytime "restrictions" on hunting are loosened or lifted, it is a win for the entire hunting community.  i can't wait for the Northern Zone to follow suite now...



My final thought is... That we finally have a winner for most ignorant statement made so far.  Let's just go ahead and abolish all hunting "laws"and "restrictions" and then we all will be winners.  

I will have a hard time shaking somebody's hand and telling them congratulations on killing a deer over a bait pile


----------



## georgiabow

Lance45lb said:


> My final thought is... That we finally have a winner for most ignorant statement made so far.  Let's just go ahead and abolish all hunting "laws"and "restrictions" and then we all will be winners.
> 
> You Florida boys can keep your corn out of the Northern Zone



i think alot of the northern folks wouldnt be so against it if they got to do it too..........


----------



## drhunt20

rex upshaw said:


> I did too.



As you should have to voice your opinion! I'm just saying that I would bet that some that dislike this did not.


----------



## UYD4L

BornToHuntAndFish said:


> Thanks for the map, Mechanicaldawg!



I thought Arkansas allowed baiting.


----------



## BERN

Food plots are not the same as a pile of corn or feeder. Why? because they consist of different plants and may benefit wildlife other than deer.

If you think this needs to be vetoed then you can call the Governor's office at 404-656-1776 and ask him to do so.

You can also go to the following site  to quickly find your Senators and ask them to defeat this on the floor
http://www.votesmart.org/official_state.php?state_id=GA&dist=&go2.x=5&go2.y=8


----------



## JBowers

UYD4L said:


> I thought Arkansas allowed baiting.


 
The map doesn't show Arkansas as prohibiting shooting over bait.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

We lost courtesy of the Legislative Black Caucus and few north Georgia Republicans, especially newcomers.  Thrity-five of 49 LBC Members (71%) traded their vote to Jason Shaw and Jay Roberts.  It would bring closure to know what those vote costs the taxpayers or what it cost in terms of conservative principles.

Without the LBC votes, they would have only had 87 votes; not enough to acheive the requisite constitutional majority.


----------



## Marlin_444

georgiabow said:


> i think alot of the northern folks wouldnt be so against it if they got to do it too..........



Ding... Ding... Ding...  we have a winner...  now we know... The Northern Zone is concerned that all of baiting down south will draw all of the deer away... 

OMG...  Let's go hunting!

Ron


----------



## UYD4L

JBowers said:


> The map doesn't show Arkansas as prohibiting shooting over bait.



Haha. I need to learn my geography I guess.  The really sad part is I lived there for a year!


----------



## UYD4L

Mechanicaldawg said:


> We lost courtesy of the Legislative Black Caucus and few north Georgia Republicans, especially newcomers.  Thrity-five of 49 LBC Members (71%) traded their vote to Jason Shaw and Jay Roberts.  It would bring closure to know what those vote costs the taxpayers or what it cost in terms of conservative principles.
> 
> Without the LBC votes, they would have only had 87 votes; not enough to acheive the requisite constitutional majority.



You know thats not what you are really upset about.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

UYD4L said:


> You know thats not what you are really upset about.



Actually, I am much more upset about the selling of conservative principles over this issue than I am the baiting thing.

However, this is another, and perhaps the primary, reason that rules and regulations relative to wildlife management have no business being discussed under the Gold Dome and should be handled by trained wildlife professionals who have no political weight to wield.


----------



## Cadcom

Maybe next year they will pass a leash law and you can shoot deer off the end of a leash. About as sporty as baiting. But hey - have at. Just please call it what it is - it's shooting. Dang sure isn't hunting.


----------



## runswithbeer

yep, stock piling my georgia gold right now.  Follow the yellow brick road


----------



## runswithbeer

nobody whines about baiting fish


----------



## UYD4L

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Actually, I am much more upset about the selling of conservative principles over this issue than I am the baiting thing.
> 
> However, this is another, and perhaps the primary, reason that rules and regulations relative to wildlife management have no business being discussed under the Gold Dome and should be handled by trained wildlife professionals who have no political weight to wield.



You don't even know what the deal was.  If nobody made deals in Congress nothing would ever get passed.  Stuff like this probably happens every day.  I'm sure you are down in the political section pointing it out all the time.  Maybe you should wait to see what the deal was before you start saying how terrible it is.

Yeah because government agencies are immune from political influence.


----------



## General Lee

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Actually, I am much more upset about the selling of conservative principles over this issue than I am the baiting thing.


Conservative principles also applies to getting the government off our land and letting  landowners make more decisions...........


----------



## buckfiddy

rex upshaw said:


> A small sampling is not the majority. They should have asked the wildlife biologist what they thought and gone off their recommendation, if anything. This bill is garbage, and I have zero respect for those who pushed for it, at both the hunter and state level.



Rex every poll I have come a cross, on this site, in GON magazine, other Ga. hunting magazines, and etc. has been for baiting. With my job I talk to a lot of Ga. hunters, and everyone I have talked with were for it. I don't agree with this but most are of the mind set that it is no deferent than hunting a food plot.

You are right...I might of spoke out of turn, but the only people I see that are not for it are the few on here. For me that's not the majority of Ga.'s deer hunters.


----------



## CamoCop

Lance45lb said:


> My final thought is... That we finally have a winner for most ignorant statement made so far.  Let's just go ahead and abolish all hunting "laws"and "restrictions" and then we all will be winners.
> 
> I will have a hard time shaking somebody's hand and telling them congratulations on killing a deer over a bait pile



you're right!  what was i thinking!  please except my deepest apology!  we as hunters need to lobby for MORE restrictions on hunting!  regardless of what our personal feelings and beliefs are.  we need to lobby for outlawing ALL guns and muzzle loaders.  after all, it's only "sporting" to use bows....anything else ain't fair chase!  oh and the bows can not have ANY wheels or pulley's! if we can get this past into law...the anti-hunting organizations are sure gonna leave us alone!!!!!


----------



## rex upshaw

buckfiddy said:


> Rex every poll I have come a cross, on this site, in GON magazine, other Ga. hunting magazines, and etc. has been for baiting. With my job I talk to a lot of Ga. hunters, and everyone I have talked with were for it. I don't agree with this but most are of the mind set that it is no deferent than hunting a food plot.
> 
> You are right...I might of spoke out of turn, but the only people I see that are not for it are the few on here. For me that's not the majority of Ga.'s deer hunters.



Most of the older south Georgia hunters I know, are firmly against it, have never picked up a GON magazine and certainly don't read the forum. As I have said previously, had they listened to the wildlife biologist and not the $, the vote would have been far different. I would think as hunters and people who want to continue to enjoy the good thing we have, the health of the herd would have been the most important objective here.


----------



## kmckinnie

CamoCop said:


> you're right!  what was i thinking!  please except my deepest apology!  we as hunters need to lobby for MORE restrictions on hunting!  regardless of what our personal feelings and beliefs are.  we need to lobby for outlawing ALL guns and muzzle loaders.  after all, it's only "sporting" to use bows....anything else ain't fair chase!  oh and the bows can not have ANY wheels or pulley's!



Hey,Hey,Hey No wheels or pulleys' Well we might aswell draggem out! No 4wheelers No stands period! Can't even sit by a tree!


----------



## buckfiddy

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.
> 
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?



I'm keeping my subscription, and my last few replies are the first in a while. I got fed up with all the bickering going on in the deer forum. Mods having to lock threads because people would get out of hand. We don't have to worry about anti-hunters stopping our hunting, we hunters are going to do it. You can look here and see the proof.


----------



## kmckinnie

buckfiddy said:


> I'm keeping my subscription, and my last few replies are the first in a while. I got fed up with all the bickering going on in the deer forum. Mods having to lock threads because people would get out of hand. We don't have to worry about anti-hunters stopping our hunting, we hunters are going to do it. You can look here and see the proof.




Thanks I tried earlier! This forum has done a great job of putting up with us on this subject!

Thanks GUYS


----------



## gator1969

Does anyone have the results from the last poll that was done asking if you were for or against hunting over bait?


----------



## buckfiddy

gator1969 said:


> Does anyone have the results from the last poll that was done asking if you were for or against hunting over bait?



I think this is the last. The poll is not shown anymore but you can read the results.  Do a search, alot will pop up.

http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=607102&highlight=baiting+polls


----------



## buckfiddy

I'm sorry...that poll I posted was from GON, but still do a search and you can read for hours.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> Most of the older south Georgia hunters I know, are firmly against it, have never picked up a GON magazine and certainly don't read the forum. As I have said previously, had they listened to the wildlife biologist and not the $, the vote would have been far different. I would think as hunters and people who want to continue to enjoy the good thing we have, the health of the herd would have been the most important objective here.



Florida's deer herd is not unhealthy, nor is Texas's or Kentucky's and last I heard South Carolina's herd was healthy as ever so what makes you think that Georgia's herd will become unhealthy.

Are you a member on a lease in south GA rex?  I thought I read a post here where you said you hunted the southern part.  If you are what makes you so sure your members aren't going to be baiting?


----------



## Scrub Buck

Hunters don't support baiting.  Baiters do.  To give you another example.  A person who shoots deer at night may call himself a hunter.  In reality he is a poacher.  I wish everyone who supports baiting would get it right.  Hunters don't bait they hunt.  Hence the name Hunter.


----------



## BornToHuntAndFish

If the Georgia Senate passes this bill & then likely Gov. Deal will probably pass it since he has said he's in favor of how Texas does hunting, then it sounds like GA Southern Zone hunting lease prices will go up significantly with the increased demand kind of like the trophy counties but probably even more than that.


----------



## ridgestalker

Here is a t shirts design i will be selling if the bill passes gona make millions.Hurry up an order limited supply.


----------



## deermeat270

ridgestalker said:


> Here is a t shirts design i will be selling if the bill passes gona make millions.Hurry up an order limited supply.



Go TEAM CORN!!!


----------



## tfbowen

hunters in northern zone should have same options as southern zone


----------



## deermeat270

tfbowen said:


> hunters in northern zone should have same options as southern zone



We do...we can bait for hogs during deer season.  Instead of deer hunting im going to hog hunt all season.


----------



## CRIMINOLES

this is so stupid. i will be hunting alabama from now on ,yall can have this georgia bull.:mad


----------



## tfbowen

what happend to equal rights in the persuit of happiness


----------



## swampdaddy

*What the?*

If I put rice or wheat in the water to attract fish then catch a mess of them 3 days later am I sorry fisherman or just effective?

Whats the difference between this and baiting deer?
 I REALLY don't get why so many people are so torn up over this.It really makes me wonder if the ones screaming the loudest against hunting over bait are worried that they will capitulate and try it themselves. The self righteousness I have seen displayed here this week amongst grown men is disgusting. 

Daddy always said the scalded cat screamed the loudest, and Y'all cats are deafening!!!

And, I have NEVER needed or used corn to kill a big buck.


----------



## tfbowen

i have never shot anything over bait but if my neighbor across the property line gets the oppertunity why shouldnt i


----------



## Scrub Buck

Swapdaddy,

To answer your question...Yes you are a Sorry fisherman.


----------



## Red350SS

Anybody heard yet about the sky falling? I watched all day, and nothing....man, was that boring...


----------



## swampdaddy

*more judgement and righteousness!!!!*

Says you O righteous one. 
Maybe later I'll post some pics of those 3 pound shell crackers I caught and you can tell me how wrong I am.

Dude-ITS JUST A DEER!!!!!!! GET OVER IT!!!!!!!




Scrub Buck said:


> Swapdaddy,
> 
> To answer your question...Yes you are a Sorry fisherman.


----------



## Mako22

What a stupid subject to argue over, as one member said on GON a few months back, it's just a pine goat get over it!


----------



## G Duck

CRIMINOLES said:


> this is so stupid. i will be hunting alabama from now on ,yall can have this georgia bull.:mad


----------



## swampdaddy

*see ya*

Dont let the door hit you on the way out!!!

I -20 runs east and west, dont stop till you hit Alabama brother!!!







G Duck said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ReYfu5E-hOE


----------



## kmckinnie

buckfiddy said:


> I'm sorry...that poll I posted was from GON, but still do a search and you can read for hours.



Thanks for the up date!


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

One of the legislators who supported it called white-tailed deer a pest.  There you have it, HB 277 supports the pestification of white-tailed deer!  Don't believe then watch the archived video of the 30th LD in the House.  It'll be during the last hour of the video.


When aiming for the common denominator, be prepared for the occasional division by zero.

Shooting deer over bait is a tool that's designed to meet the needs of the lowest common denominator.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up!


----------



## 270 guy

Jeff Phillips said:


> The sun and a spotlight both provide light to shoot by, there is no difference between the two. Is that where your arguement goes next?



You just have no clue do you? Spotlights are illegal there is a huge difference to legal hunters guess you don't know that difference  from the replies you keep making. I don't have an argument you do, I hunt legally wherever I hunt. I love all the whinning going on in this thread now.


----------



## G Duck

I heard rumor that it passed in the Senate today, anyone else heard this? I have been on the road, and got a call from a buddy that said it did.   Rex, or Mechdawg, can you confirm??


----------



## General Lee

Mechanicaldawg said:


> One of the legislators who supported it called white-tailed deer a pest.  There you have it, HB 277 supports the pestification of white-tailed deer!


They are a pest,a nusiance.No other animal in this state costs the farmers as much a these thicket goats.Then you factor the damage to folks' yards,gardens and then vehicle collisions sometimes even resulting in death.............


----------



## 243Savage

Folks....

This thread is starting to take a turn it shouldn't.

Lay off the insults and intimidating comments.

Keep the discussion civil.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

General Lee said:


> They are a pest,a nusiance.No other animal in this state costs the farmers as much a these thicket goats.Then you factor the damage to folks' yards,gardens and then vehicle collisions sometimes even resulting in death.............




feral swine do


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

G Duck said:


> I heard rumor that it passed in the Senate today, anyone else heard this? I have been on the road, and got a call from a buddy that said it did.   Rex, or Mechdawg, can you confirm??



Another uninformed jackwagon spreading rumors, neither the Senate or the House were in session today as is typical after crossover day; they take a few days off.  Sorry you got bad information G Duck.  Must have been, well we know what type of hunter they aren't...


----------



## rex upshaw

G Duck said:


> I heard rumor that it passed in the Senate today, anyone else heard this? I have been on the road, and got a call from a buddy that said it did.   Rex, or Mechdawg, can you confirm??



Haven't heard.


----------



## G Duck

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Another uninformed jackwagon, neither the Senate or the House were in session today as is typical after crossover day; they take a few days off



I dont have as much time on my hands to follow it. Thanks


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> Are you a member on a lease in south GA rex?  I thought I read a post here where you said you hunted the southern part.  If you are what makes you so sure your members aren't going to be baiting?



Will not be an issue, we don't let folks like that hunt with us.


----------



## runswithbeer

just bought 2 tons of corn.  im selling bulk if anybody wants a head start on the baiting.....wow nelly hold on here comes the georgia gold


----------



## kmckinnie

rex upshaw said:


> Will not be an issue, we don't let folks like that hunt with us.



Are you the prez there?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

kmckinnie said:


> Are you the prez there?



First HHIC is the Landowner
Second HHIC is Club President

Alot of dem boys down yonner gonna be upset when landowner tells em Not on my Property Jackwagon.


----------



## rex upshaw

kmckinnie said:


> Are you the prez there?



I'm instrumental in making the rules. No yella nuggets for us. If they don't like it, too bad.


----------



## G Duck

runswithbeer said:


> just bought 2 tons of corn.  im selling bulk if anybody wants a head start on the baiting.....wow nelly hold on here comes the georgia gold



What are you going to do if it does not pass? I heard it will not be as close in the Senate


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> Will not be an issue, we don't let folks like that hunt with us.



Bet you might be surprised if it passes that some of those "folks" might not totally share your opinion.  Funny how things can change that way sometimes, especially after a law change like this one, course provided it does change.  I seen a member on here that has a club in Alapaha which he is a co-founder of  and I have read his threads that shows that he is dead against the baiting and made comments to that regard on this board.  I also know his club is made up of mostly Florida hunters, several who are my friends and I know they can't wait to start throwing the yellow acorns as they have already told me how happy they are that the billed passed the house.  I am sure he will be surprised when he hits the property and finds all the feeders and piles that they will start putting out.  Quite a predicament to be in if you ask me, stand by your views or join the group.


----------



## shdw633

Mechanicaldawg said:


> First HHIC is the Landowner
> Second HHIC is Club President
> 
> Alot of dem boys down yonner gonna be upset when landowner tells em Not on my Property Jackwagon.



What did you do see a re-run of Full Metal Jacket?  What's with all the Jackwagon comments????

Most landowners are timber companys, don't see to much problems with landowners in that situation.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> I'm instrumental in making the rules. No yella nuggets for us. If they don't like it, too bad.



Too bad till you can't fill the lease and then either have to pay for it all yourself or give it up because you won't allow your members to do what the law allows them to do and therefore cannot find any new members to replace the ones that leave.


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> Bet you might be surprised if it passes that some of those "folks" might not totally share your opinion.  :



I don't hunt with a bunch of yahoo's. We are like minded in our approach. they will hunt fair chase, or hunt elsewhere.


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> Too bad till you can't fill the lease and then either have to pay for it all yourself or give it up because you won't allow your members to do what the law allows them to do and therefore cannot find any new members to replace the ones that leave.



You are way off base, if you think that everyone in the southern zone has cashed in their ethics.


----------



## kmckinnie

Mechanicaldawg said:


> First HHIC is the Landowner
> Second HHIC is Club President
> 
> Alot of dem boys down yonner gonna be upset when landowner tells em Not on my Property Jackwagon.


 Well thats the landowners choise! Things change daily! It has not passed yet! And your not the spokesman for all the land owners! Jackwagon!






What does that mean!



rex upshaw said:


> I'm instrumental in making the rules. No yella nuggets for us. If they don't like it, too bad.


 Instrumental is a big word! We live in a democracy! The vote there just mite count! You just voted there for everyone! What is that called where you speak so boldly for everyone and we have not heard there voice!

Then the threat to your mems!  TOO BAD! 







I guess its your place do as you please! Thats why we VOTE!


----------



## rex upshaw

If you hunt with people who share the same values, you have less issues. Everyone that hunts this property is, and always has been against baiting, legal or not. Ethics goes beyond what is law.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> You are way off base, if you think that everyone in the southern zone has cashed in their ethics.



I'd bet I'm closer to being on base than you are, for if I wasn't this bill would have never even made it to the floor.


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> I'd bet I'm closer to being on base than you are, for if I wasn't this bill would have never even made it to the floor.



Plantations with money was more of a factor then you would think.


----------



## kmckinnie

As far as I can tell I have not said If I'm for or againt! I said I hunt the same as always! What ever the vote is I'll be just fine! Ispeak for myself only!

We have been warned about name calling and insults!
This thread has taken a turn for the worst!
Lets act like gentlmen!  What ever the outcome is!

Thanks your fellowman!


----------



## kmckinnie

I'am working on a plantation! !4,ooo acres!


----------



## rex upshaw

kmckinnie said:


> As far as I can tell I have not said If I'm for or againt! I said I hunt the same as always! What ever the vote is I'll be just fine! Ispeak for myself only!
> 
> We have been warned about name calling and insults!
> This thread has taken a turn for the worst!
> Lets act like gentlmen!  What ever the outcome is!
> 
> Thanks your fellowman!



So what is your stance?


----------



## swampdaddy

*I know*

I was trying to tell him that and got all excited and messed up. 






G Duck said:


> Swampdaddy, I aint leavin, that was for Crimonoles


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> Plantations with money was more of a factor then you would think.



I think it is funny how when the bill was always defeated in the past it was "hunters standing up for what's right" and now that you may lose it's "money is the reason, corruption, corruption".  Funny how it works that way in politics, when they do what YOU want their great representatives but when they go against what YOU want their corrupt.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> Blah blahblah.



This is exactly what several of you keep saying over and over.  get over it it most likely will become legal to sit over it instead of 201 yards and out of site. If your not happy with it put up your weapon or don't bait it's pretty simple. It's  funny 680+ post and still more of the same whinning over and over.


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> I think it is funny how when the bill was always defeated in the past it was "hunters standing up for what's right" and now that you may lose it's "money is the reason, corruption, corruption".  Funny how it works that way in politics, when they do what YOU want their great representatives but when they go against what YOU want their corrupt.



Where did I say corrupt?  I posted an article earlier this week, that stated that there was a huge push by the south Georgia plantations and it was said that baiting would Guarantee their clients a shot at deer. And why do you feel comfortable about non-hunters pushing a bill through? I would think we all would benefit if there was factual evidence, by the wildlife biologist, that this was a good idea. Problem is, they don't support it.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> Where did I say corrupt?  I posted an article earlier this week, that stated that there was a huge push by the south Georgia plantations and it was said that baiting would Guarantee their clients a shot at deer. And why do you feel comfortable about non-hunters pushing a bill through? I would think we all would benefit if there was factual evidence, by the wildlife biologist, that this was a good idea. Problem is, they don't support it.



Your the one that said money was the reason for the vote, that's corruption!  You said Plantations with the MONEY was the reason for the vote.  That's would imply corruption!  Second I do feel that it was hunters that pushed the bill thru.  When you only have a little over 6000 people respond to an issue when there are over 30,000 licensed hunters out there that tells you something.  It tells you that 24,000 plus hunters (and that is licensed HUNTERS not just the non-hunting public included in that number) either want it or don't care which way it goes and those are my numbers those are the numbers Mechanical Dawg stated earlier.  If I was a representative and seen those numbers I surely would think that my constituents want the bill to pass.  Why is it so hard for you to believe that you COULD be in the minority on this issue?


----------



## emusmacker

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.
> 
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?


Never have subscribed to GON magazine, will continue to view all forums and as far as pics, I've never seen a pic of a dead deer with his head in a bait pile.  I've seen plenty of deer pics but how do you or anyone else know how or where it was killed.  

Also do you consider Oats, wheat, soybeans, or clay peas as natural vegetation.?  They are/were planted, so they can't be natural vegetation, right?  do you hunt these food plots?  And if ever given the opportunity, would you< Rex< ever hunt over planted apple trees, or non native sawtooth oaks?


----------



## kmckinnie

rex upshaw said:


> So what is your stance?


I'm not going to jump up and down either way!Theres good and bad either way! I hunt naturally! There will be some killed but that is going to happen! People have hunted over corn sence I started hunting inGa.With that said I never did Because it was againt the law! I don't hunt looking over my shoulder!  I have always killed deer! And  big ones! Bigger than the average! I DON"T NEED CORN TO KILL A GOOD BUCK!!!!!!!!!!! But if people want to hunt over corn and manage hunt thats fine! You can only kill 2 in Ga. Some areas its 8 or better! Our club is 8 or better! It is not the magic dust! Yea some will get one,but the deer will adjust!  They have been going this aslong as I've been here!   They the hunters put to much out there to hunt over! Its everywhere! Come opening weekend if it legal it will be everywhere! More than last year! But thats OK cause I know how to hunt and so does everyone of my group! We hunt the RUT come November! Trail,funnels and bottlenecks saddles! Road crossings! 

We'll all be just fine!  The ones that have feeders will walk around them scout like always! Check there cams at them when they get there onfriday! By the truck or 4 wheeler!

Our little spot up therewill hold deer and they will travel and eat the clubs corn next to us and return to where they are not chased!  We walk in everytime no matter about weather or anything! I don't hunt out of a box! Killed the one in my advatar off of a fold out chair! I have 3 tree climbers and2 lean ups! They have been on the same trees for years!

Corn in our area = hogs and I hope they kill plenty!

We are ok with it if anyone wants it well it its the law! WE heard shots last year over corn next to us HOGS and some deer we think! We reported it nothing happened!

DNR could not enforce it too many!Might as well be the law!
It will even out the playing feild! I tell my group about PRESSURE! Lets don't do that!  We plant plots! Hunt around them! Between them stuff like that! Bow season we will sit on a hot plot! Thats how we hunt and how I stand! If it the law, well Its a persons choice!

I want to buy stock in feeder motors! And batteries! If its legal!

I will turn in wildlife violators! Night hunting, poaching Stealing!  

Lets give the mods and admins a break this weekend they have been more than Fair!
Rex thanks for asking me! Good luck to everyone next year! k


----------



## gemcgrew

We use food plots to make it easier for the wives and children to kill deer. Helps get them interested in the sport. Now we will be able to accomplish the same thing with a bucket and a bag. Win win!

As far as ethics go, I would never tell you that you to must hunt over a feeder in order to be ethical.


----------



## maker4life

rex upshaw said:


> Plantations with money was more of a factor then you would think.



Plantations with money down here couldn't care less about a pine goat .


----------



## Mako22

I am always amazed at the amount of sheer ignorance on this subject and the amount of emotion that it evokes. I honestly believe that some of you that have commented on this thread actually worship the white tailed deer like a god or something. 

You spend thousands of dollars chasing a 125-180 pound four legged pest so that you can mount it's head and hang it on your wall. Once it is on the wall you can tell all your buddies what a big man you are and how you did not use corn to kill it. No you used your superior hunting skills to track it down, ambush it and then blow it's heart out with a high powererd rifle. What a man you are, I wish I could be just half the man that you big buck, non corn using hunters are! 

The sad reality is that one day your gonna be laying in a coffin at a funeral home and nobody will care about how you killed your deer or how big a deer you killed in your life. That buck you spent hundreds on to have mounted will after a few short years be thrown in a dumpster with the garbage. The deer you worship so much will still be here after you are gone, corn or no corn!

I'll hunt as long as I can but I'm gonna keep things in priority like my God, my family and my job.


----------



## Mako22

maker4life said:


> Plantations with money down here couldn't care less about a pine goat .



You got that right.


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> If you hunt with people who share the same values, you have less issues. Everyone that hunts this property is, and always has been against baiting, legal or not. Ethics goes beyond what is law.


you are so against this that its almost suspicious......... i bet you already have your feeder locations figured out, and the stands only about 20 yards away.


----------



## swampdaddy

*thats what Im talkin about !!*

Preach on brother, preach on!!!!!!







Woodsman69 said:


> I am always amazed at the amount of sheer ignorance on this subject and the amount of emotion that it evokes. I honestly believe that some of you that have commented on this thread actually worship the white tailed deer like a god or something.
> 
> You spend thousands of dollars chasing a 125-180 pound four legged pest so that you can mount it's head and hang it on your wall. Once it is on the wall you can tell all your buddies what a big man you are and how you did not use corn to kill it. No you used your superior hunting skills to track it down, ambush it and then blow it's heart out with a high powererd rifle. What a man you are, I wish I could be just half the man that you big buck, non corn using hunters are!
> 
> The sad reality is that one day your gonna be laying in a coffin at a funeral home and nobody will care about how you killed your deer or how big a deer you killed in your life. That buck you spent hundreds on to have mounted will after a few short years be thrown in a dumpster with the garbage. The deer you worship so much will still be here after you are gone, corn or no corn!
> 
> I'll hunt as long as I can but I'm gonna keep things in priority like my God, my family and my job.


----------



## CRIMINOLES

Woodsman69 said:


> I am always amazed at the amount of sheer ignorance on this subject and the amount of emotion that it evokes. I honestly believe that some of you that have commented on this thread actually worship the white tailed deer like a god or something.
> 
> You spend thousands of dollars chasing a 125-180 pound four legged pest so that you can mount it's head and hang it on your wall. Once it is on the wall you can tell all your buddies what a big man you are and how you did not use corn to kill it. No you used your superior hunting skills to track it down, ambush it and then blow it's heart out with a high powererd rifle. What a man you are, I wish I could be just half the man that you big buck, non corn using hunters are!
> 
> The sad reality is that one day your gonna be laying in a coffin at a funeral home and nobody will care about how you killed your deer or how big a deer you killed in your life. That buck you spent hundreds on to have mounted will after a few short years be thrown in a dumpster with the garbage. The deer you worship so much will still be here after you are gone, corn or no corn!
> 
> I'll hunt as long as I can but I'm gonna keep things in priority like my God, my family and my job.



agree with it all but mine is god,family and hunting ,my job is like 12th on list.lol


----------



## G Duck

Woodsman69 said:


> You got that right.



X3


With all of the problems in the state. We ought to be more concerned about the budget. If we think corn for deer is the front issue, we are in trouble.


----------



## General Lee

Woodsman69 said:


> I am always amazed at the amount of sheer ignorance on this subject and the amount of emotion that it evokes. I honestly believe that some of you that have commented on this thread actually worship the white tailed deer like a god or something.
> 
> You spend thousands of dollars chasing a 125-180 pound four legged pest so that you can mount it's head and hang it on your wall. Once it is on the wall you can tell all your buddies what a big man you are and how you did not use corn to kill it. No you used your superior hunting skills to track it down, ambush it and then blow it's heart out with a high powererd rifle. What a man you are, I wish I could be just half the man that you big buck, non corn using hunters are!
> 
> The sad reality is that one day your gonna be laying in a coffin at a funeral home and nobody will care about how you killed your deer or how big a deer you killed in your life. That buck you spent hundreds on to have mounted will after a few short years be thrown in a dumpster with the garbage. The deer you worship so much will still be here after you are gone, corn or no corn!
> 
> I'll hunt as long as I can but I'm gonna keep things in priority like my God, my family and my job.


Chop that tree down and let the chips fall where they may.........


----------



## whitetail killa

which zone is jones county in


----------



## OutFoxed

jones is northern zone


----------



## kmckinnie

I didn't Like what I had to do just now! I had to tell a friend of mine corn mite be legal soon! You should of seen his face! Hes killed deer there already!! I not sure how he took it! Heres some pics of his deer!












There one more thing that would upset him! That is if Ga gave him a free set of tags! Hes from fla. And they don't do that  Yet! WE pay for that! And we are glad we can!


----------



## GA DAWG

kmckinnie said:


> I didn't Like what I had to do just now! I had to tell a friend of mine corn mite be legal soon! You should of seen his face! Hes killed deer there already!! I not sure how he took it! Heres some pics of his deer!
> 
> 
> 
> There one more thing that would upset him! That is if Ga gave him a free set of tags! Hes from fla. And they don't do that  Yet! WE pay for that! And we are glad we can!


Yall sound like good people!!!!!! I hope he kills the biggest buck in the state next season


----------



## rex upshaw

emusmacker said:


> Also do you consider Oats, wheat, soybeans, or clay peas as natural vegetation.?  They are/were planted, so they can't be natural vegetation, right?  do you hunt these food plots?  And if ever given the opportunity, would you< Rex< ever hunt over planted apple trees, or non native sawtooth oaks?



I consider oats and soybeans as food plots and no, I don't hunt over food plots. No, I haven't hunted over apple trees, or non native trees. We rarely plant plots, but when we do, I don't hunt them, as i prefer to get deep in the woods.


----------



## rex upshaw

Hats off to you kmckinnie, that's good stuff.


----------



## Twenty five ought six

Mechanicaldawg said:


> First HHIC is the Landowner
> Second HHIC is Club President
> 
> Alot of dem boys down yonner gonna be upset when landowner tells em Not on my Property Jackwagon.




From the bill:



> if the hunter has written
> 40 permission of the landowner to hunt upon, over, around, or near such feed or bait,
> 41 except as otherwise provided by paragraph (3) of this subsection



It's going to be real interesting to see how many of the big timber companies are going  to go on record as supporting baiting.


----------



## buckfiddy

Twenty five ought six said:


> From the bill:
> 
> 
> 
> It's going to be real interesting to see how many of the big timber companies are going  to go on record as supporting baiting.



You might be surprised.


----------



## rex upshaw

I do not think the timber companies are going to have a problem leasing their land.


----------



## deermeat270

The timber companies already have land in states that allow baiting.  Why would they have a problem now?


----------



## Twenty five ought six

deermeat270 said:


> The timber companies already have land in states that allow baiting.  Why would they have a problem now?




Because as far as I can determine, none of those states require *written permission* from the landowner.


Lots different PR affect from "allowing" something because it's the law, and putting it in writing that you endorse the practice.


----------



## General Lee

Twenty five ought six said:


> Because as far as I can determine, none of those states require *written permission* from the landowner.
> 
> 
> Lots different PR affect from "allowing" something because it's the law, and putting it in writing that you endorse the practice.


Grasping at straws............


----------



## Red350SS

Everybody, on both sides, please remember that at the end of the day, this is "just" deer hunting, to be honest with ya, outside of our circle of hunters, most people dont care about hunting on eay or the other....its just something that "other" folks do....deer hunting is a hobby, recreation, just like baseball, football, or soccer.....in the big picture it really means very little to many many folks....bait or no bait.....if you look at it like that, making enemies here ovr any one topic, claiming to be on the side of the majority is just plain stupid.....you have 3 groups.....hunters, people who dont hunt, and dont care about hunting, and anti hunters....so what good is a 4th ("pro baiters") 5th group(anti baiters)????????....  I stand by what my clubs number one rule is....go by GA law....if the law says you can sit over corn, fine, if it says ya cant, dont....no biggie for me. The problem (from both sides) is when one side tries to force their view on the other side. Causes nothing but problems, and makes adults look like children. Either that, or we have many children on this forum masquerading as adults....


----------



## BERN

Red350SS said:


> The problem (from both sides) is when one side tries to force their view on the other side.




This is the heart of the matter. If baiting is illegal, then all that find it unethical can hunt with confidence they have as good a chance as any to harvest a deer. When baiting is legal and everyone on the 5 clubs around me is doing it then I can either join the crowd or sit in a tree and see nothing all fall. Legalizing baiting alienates 1/3-1/2 of the hunters. Keeping it illegal does not because the people that want to can still harvest a buck or two.

It is essentially taking the freedom away from hunters that weren't raised this way and may not have the resources to travel to the northern zone all fall.


----------



## Red350SS

BERN said:


> This is the heart of the matter. If baiting is illegal, then all that find it unethical can hunt with confidence they have as good a chance as any to harvest a deer. When baiting is legal and everyone on the 5 clubs around me is doing it then I can either join the crowd or sit in a tree and see nothing all fall. Legalizing baiting alienates 1/3-1/2 of the hunters. Keeping it illegal does not because the people that want to can still harvest a buck or two.
> 
> It is essentially taking the freedom away from hunters that weren't raised this way and may not have the resources to travel to the northern zone all fall.



I dont see it that way. I am neither for nor against baiting. If it becomes law, I might, if it isnt, I wont. I know that several of the clubs around us bait and have baited for years, seen too much corn in too many dead deer to be otherwise, and heard too much scuttlebutt to believe there isnt corn being fed on adjoining property. What I havent seen, and what many that oppose baiting seem to fear, is that they will have no deer because the other guy is baiting. In GA. where we have plenty of browse, plenty of acorns, and deer dont rely on corn for their main food source, i simply do not believe that "all" deer will become dependant on corn for food. Will some? sure. Will all? No....   This coming from a hunter who has been hunting for 30 years on the same tract, seen clubs surrounding him come and go, and has still managed to kill deer when I want, and has never planted a food plot, nor baited.  I am more concerned with the attitudes of hunters on both sides. This issue has turned it into we vs them....and the vocal ones on both sides are acting childish. When you have antibaiters calling anyone that shoots a deer using bait an idiot, and the pro baiters calling anyone that is against them not much better, than there is a problem. We are all adults, just seems several cant act it. There is a way to argue points both ways, neither way is perfect or ideal, but somehwere there has to be a middle ground. That is what this country is based on....its called compromise, not belittlement...


----------



## G Duck

I have a question. Deermeat270   What in the sam hill is that in your Avatar? I have to find my glasses


----------



## G Duck

By the way, if it does not pass, this has been the biggest waste of time in the history of this site.


----------



## shdw633

BERN said:


> This is the heart of the matter. If baiting is illegal, then all that find it unethical can hunt with confidence they have as good a chance as any to harvest a deer. When baiting is legal and everyone on the 5 clubs around me is doing it then I can either join the crowd or sit in a tree and see nothing all fall. Legalizing baiting alienates 1/3-1/2 of the hunters. Keeping it illegal does not because the people that want to can still harvest a buck or two.
> 
> It is essentially taking the freedom away from hunters that weren't raised this way and may not have the resources to travel to the northern zone all fall.



I would agree with you on this statement if supplemental feeding as a whole was banned but the 5 clubs that you are hypothetically speaking of are already pouring the corn to the ground and have been for some time, all this law does is allow them to hunt near it.....that's all it does.  Hunters have been supplemental feeding or throwing corn, whatever you wish to call it, for as long as I can remember and that is at least over a decade of time.  Some take their chances and hunt over it while others, such as myself, do it the legal way and hunt 200 yards away and out of sight, regardless, the corn and protien feed is still there, still throwing it out in a timely manner.  So if you have been seeing deer on your property so far it is my bet that nothing will change because the corn you are so worried about is already there and always has been.


----------



## Twenty five ought six

General Lee said:


> Grasping at straws............




I'm not grasping at straws at all --won't affect me one bit.


I'm just waiting to see the letters from Rayonier, Plum Creek, and so on, giving written permission to bait.  Far as I know those are all publicly held companies.

No written permission = no baiting.

That's part of the law is more restrictive than the current 200 yard rule.


----------



## centerc

Less Goberrment = Good in my book should be state wide


----------



## Catdaddy SC

Twenty five ought six said:


> I'm not grasping at straws at all --won't affect me one bit.
> 
> 
> I'm just waiting to see the letters from Rayonier, Plum Creek, and so on, giving written permission to bait.  Far as I know those are all publicly held companies.
> 
> No written permission = no baiting.
> 
> That's part of the law is more restrictive than the current 200 yard rule.



It will be in their renewal leases.


----------



## Catdaddy SC

BERN said:


> This is the heart of the matter. If baiting is illegal, then all that find it unethical can hunt with confidence they have as good a chance as any to harvest a deer. When baiting is legal and everyone on the 5 clubs around me is doing it then I can either join the crowd or sit in a tree and see nothing all fall. Legalizing baiting alienates 1/3-1/2 of the hunters. Keeping it illegal does not because the people that want to can still harvest a buck or two.
> 
> It is essentially taking the freedom away from hunters that weren't raised this way and may not have the resources to travel to the northern zone all fall.




You might want to think through that one again. Nothing is going to change as far as bait holding or moving deer from one property to the next. That's already happening. The new regulation just allows someone to hunt closer to it.


----------



## HermanMerman

rex upshaw said:


> how will hb 277 affect you, as it relates to the deer hunting forum and the GON magagazine?
> 
> for me, i'm done with the magazine and i will most likely not visit the deer hunting forum as well.  i don't care to read articles on hunting deer over bait, or view pics of deer that were shot with their head in a corn pile.  not to mention, hunting over bait is far different than hunting over native vegetation and i don't expect to see a lot of talk about the latter going on.
> how about you, will you keep up your current activity on the forum and keep your subscription?



I had a subscription for one year and could not wait until it ran out. The only thing GON is good for is starting a campfire.


----------



## emusmacker

How will the bait in Ga make deer act so much differently than deer in the other states that allow hunting over bait?  I mean I know folks that hunt in south carolina that allows baiting and the deer haven't moved from the county adjoining it just to get the corn. Deer don't operate that way.  I mean do you seriously believe that if a county that does allow baiting will attract the majority of the deer away from the neighboring county that doesn't allow baiting?  

Again I ask why is South Carolina one of the highest poulated states as far as deer numbers, and yes that even includes the section of the state that has no baiting..  If a club puts feeders out year round just to have as a sanctuary and don't hunt it, then wouldn't it makes sense according to some of ya'lls beliefs that that "sanctuary" would hold 98% of the deer on that property?


----------



## General Lee

Twenty five ought six said:


> I'm not grasping at straws at all --won't affect me one bit.
> 
> 
> I'm just waiting to see the letters from Rayonier, Plum Creek, and so on, giving written permission to bait.  Far as I know those are all publicly held companies.
> 
> No written permission = no baiting.
> 
> That's part of the law is more restrictive than the current 200 yard rule.


It will covered in the "hunters are to abide by Ga Regulations" stipulations.This way they allow it without coming right out and saying it..............


----------



## rex upshaw

Emu, I can't speak for others, but it is a fair chase issue for me.


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> Emu, I can't speak for others, but it is a fair chase issue for me.



guns and bows are way more of a FAIR chase issue than bait. do you really think that after guns, bows, food plots, and trail cams, that a little bit of bait is just that final straw that breaks the camels back?

i mean seriously... get lame dude.


----------



## rex upshaw

georgiabow said:


> guns and bows are way more of a FAIR chase issue than bait. do you really think that after guns, bows, food plots, and trail cams, that a little bit of bait is just that final straw that breaks the camels back?
> 
> i mean seriously... get lame dude.



I hunt tight with both gun and bow, no shots over 120 yards with gun. To answer your question, yes I think hunting over a bait pile is the final straw, and bait piles are lame, dude.


----------



## rex upshaw

Emu, I saw an article from sc, dated December 22, 2010 that said sc numbers had dropped from 1 million to 750,000 and they are thinking of adding restrictions.

And unlike here, this was proposed by the dnr.


----------



## emusmacker

Did the SC article say that baiting caused the deer declination? Or could it have been the season length and harvest total?  Please do tell what they credited for the declination.


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> I hunt tight with both gun and bow, no shots over 120 yards with gun.



geez.... you'd never kill anything where i hunt.... 500 yard shot are normal out here.....


----------



## buckfiddy

I'm not saying which timber company my cousin works for, but I talked to him this morning and he said as long as it was legal they were alright with it.


----------



## rex upshaw

emusmacker said:


> Did the SC article say that baiting caused the deer declination? Or could it have been the season length and harvest total?  Please do tell what they credited for the declination.



Article didn't mention why, my post was more aimed at the talk of sc's herd being in great shape.


----------



## rex upshaw

georgiabow said:


> geez.... you'd never kill anything where i hunt.... 500 yard shot are normal out here.....



Where is out here?


----------



## G Duck

rex upshaw said:


> Where is out here?



Farm country. Place I hunt near there has a field .8 miles by about 200 yd. But I couldn't make that shot.


----------



## Throwback

rex upshaw said:


> Where is out here?


----------



## huntfourfun

I'm friends with a local farmer, he is farming over 2000 ac. of cotton and 300-400 ac. of corn.

I told him that hunting deer over bait this fall in Georgia just might be legal, his comment was this..."Why would anybody need to hunt over bait to kill deer around here?"  He had no idea about this bill.............much like many folks in the Southern Zone!  The vast majority of my hunt club member has NO IDEA about this bill.  

Guess there are more important things in life to worry about than hunting deer over bait............


----------



## BERN

Red350SS said:


> When you have antibaiters calling anyone that shoots a deer using bait an idiot, and the pro baiters calling anyone that is against them not much better, than there is a problem.



I absolutely agree with that. The debate must remain civil.

I will maintain in response to others that corn somewhere on our club at least 200 yards away is wholly different than corn under every stand but mine. Also that food plots are not the same either because the benefit other game and non game wildlife on the land. If everyone quits planting and throws out corn then the other wildlife suffers for it.


----------



## shdw633

BERN said:


> I absolutely agree with that. The debate must remain civil.
> 
> I will maintain in response to others that corn somewhere on our club at least 200 yards away is wholly different than corn under every stand but mine. Also that food plots are not the same either because the benefit other game and non game wildlife on the land. If everyone quits planting and throws out corn then the other wildlife suffers for it.



Though I don't see the difference in corn 200 yards away and corn under everystand but yours, I do agree with the foodplot being different than throwing corn for the reason you have stated above.  I have contended that if you are going to throw corn (or supplemental feed) you need to do it all year as it doesn't seem right to stop feeding the deer (and other animals) at the time when all their other food sources have dried up, however, that has been going on for years and, as stated, the only thing this law changes in that behavior is the ability to hunt within the 200 yards and not get a ticket (or in a non residents case....go to jail).


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> Emu, I can't speak for others, but it is a fair chase issue for me.



If it's legal IT IS FAIR CHASE.. what part of that don't you understand??


----------



## Jimmyp

the venom over this stuff really is ridiculous.  Like the good and noble bow hunter that will not use a crossbow, or the muzzle loader hunter that looks down his nose at a man holding a Marlin 30 30 or the endless nashing of teeth over someone who dares to shoot a deer with a 22 caliber centerfire...its disgusting. 

Lower the limits, let the entire state hunt over a corn pile if they want to, individual clubs can make their own decisions about what the want in the club and keep moving.  Its silly to have this North-South distinction, its almost like the war between the states only we need an instigating personality like Abraham Lincoln as an aggressor to start the shooting part.

Lets up north here all go hunt over a corn pile this year and when caught we will plead that "they are discriminating against us"


----------



## bigreddwon

shdw633 said:


> Though I don't see the difference in corn 200 yards away and corn under everystand but yours, I do agree with the foodplot being different than throwing corn for the reason you have stated above.  I have contended that if you are going to throw corn (or supplemental feed) you need to do it all year as it doesn't seem right to stop feeding the deer (and other animals) at the time when all their other food sources have dried up, however, that has been going on for years and, as stated, the only thing this law changes in that behavior is the ability to hunt within the 200 yards and not get a ticket (or in a non residents case....go to jail).



I fail to see the difference. Corn put out _for_ deer feeds _any_ other animal that happens to find it. All get a free meal when a hunter isn't over the pile shooting.

A food plot is man made, designed to attract, feed and manipulate animal patterns.

Its still baiting, always has been, always will be.

That being said, I'm in favor of the new laws. Let the baiting begin!!


----------



## nickel back

bigreddwon said:


> I fail to see the difference. Corn put out _for_ deer feeds _any_ other animal that happens to find it. All get a free meal when a hunter isn't over the pile shooting.
> 
> A food plot is man made, designed to attract, feed and manipulate animal patterns.Its still baiting, always has been, always will be.
> 
> That being said, I'm in favor of the new laws. Let the baiting begin!!



wrong,you fail.

stewardship comes to mind?

also,alot of us hunters plant food plots to befit the the heard not kill them off


----------



## gobbleinwoods

nickel back said:


> wrong,you fail.
> 
> stewardship comes to mind?
> 
> also,alot of us hunters plant food plots to befit the the heard not kill them off



As do little old ladies who buy ears of corn to put on a nail in the backyard to attract squirrels.


----------



## 270 guy

deermeat270 said:


> The timber companies already have land in states that allow baiting.  Why would they have a problem now?



I doubt they will have a problem. All the timber companies around here allow it. It will be simple just add one more line in the lease that says they allow baiting on there lands. I'm sure it has been going on legally for many years already. Not to mention there allowing dog hunting again on there lands.


----------



## 270 guy

Red350SS said:


> Everybody, on both sides, please remember that at the end of the day, this is "just" deer hunting, to be honest with ya, outside of our circle of hunters, most people dont care about hunting on eay or the other....its just something that "other" folks do....deer hunting is a hobby, recreation, just like baseball, football, or soccer.....in the big picture it really means very little to many many folks....bait or no bait.....if you look at it like that, making enemies here ovr any one topic, claiming to be on the side of the majority is just plain stupid.....you have 3 groups.....hunters, people who dont hunt, and dont care about hunting, and anti hunters....so what good is a 4th ("pro baiters") 5th group(anti baiters)????????....  I stand by what my clubs number one rule is....go by GA law....if the law says you can sit over corn, fine, if it says ya cant, dont....no biggie for me. The problem (from both sides) is when one side tries to force their view on the other side. Causes nothing but problems, and makes adults look like children. Either that, or we have many children on this forum masquerading as adults....


----------



## 270 guy

BERN said:


> This is the heart of the matter. If baiting is illegal, then all that find it unethical can hunt with confidence they have as good a chance as any to harvest a deer. When baiting is legal and everyone on the 5 clubs around me is doing it then I can either join the crowd or sit in a tree and see nothing all fall. Legalizing baiting alienates 1/3-1/2 of the hunters. Keeping it illegal does not because the people that want to can still harvest a buck or two.
> 
> It is essentially taking the freedom away from hunters that weren't raised this way and may not have the resources to travel to the northern zone all fall.



Not true at all. If your a good hunter you will have no problem killing deer with or without bait. Deer travel they don't just eat all day long. During the rut there not looking for food anyway.


----------



## 270 guy

Twenty five ought six said:


> I'm not grasping at straws at all --won't affect me one bit.
> 
> 
> I'm just waiting to see the letters from Rayonier, Plum Creek, and so on, giving written permission to bait.  Far as I know those are all publicly held companies.
> 
> No written permission = no baiting.
> 
> That's part of the law is more restrictive than the current 200 yard rule.



Bet they add the clause to the lease. They can either lease it to the folks that want it and add the clause or sit on it hoping anti baiters step up and pay there leases. I bet I know what they will do when push comes to shove.


----------



## 270 guy

nickel back said:


> wrong,you fail.
> 
> stewardship comes to mind?
> 
> also,alot of us hunters plant food plots to befit the the heard not kill them off



Actually he didn't fail. Most hunters plant bait plots to attract, feed and kill deer period. There are very few people who plant plots to just watch deer eat and never hunt the land the plots are on.  Corn slung provides food for as many animals as a bait plot does. It doesn't only feed deer, birds, squirrels, coons, hogs, deer, rabbits, bear and the list goes on that eat corn. Just because you used a tractor doesn't make a difference.


----------



## CamoCop

270 guy said:


> Actually he didn't fail. Most hunters plant bait plots to attract, feed and kill deer period. There are very few people who plant plots to just watch deer eat and never hunt the land the plots are on.  Corn slung provides food for as many animals as a bait plot does. It doesn't only feed deer, birds, squirrels, coons, hogs, deer, rabbits, bear and the list goes on that eat corn. Just because you used a tractor doesn't make a difference.



exactly right!  the entire state needs to be able to hunt over bait or the entire state needs to outlaw ALL bait including "bait"plots!


----------



## GA DAWG

nickel back said:


> wrong,you fail.
> 
> stewardship comes to mind?
> 
> also,alot of us hunters plant food plots to befit the the heard not kill them off


Then why do most food plots have a tower stand or tripod over looking them..Is that for the picture taking?


----------



## JBowers

It would seem to me that no person knows why MOST hunters plant wildlife openings and whether there are enough hunters sharing any one reason as to quantify the purpose.

Legality does not necessarily equate ethics, morality, or fair chase.  It could be argued that laws establish minimum expectations that civil societies impose upon themselves.


----------



## 270 guy

JBowers said:


> It would seem to me that no person knows why MOST hunters plant wildlife openings and whether there are enough hunters sharing any one reason as to quantify the purpose.
> 
> Legality does not necessarily equate ethics, morality, or fair chase.  It could be argued that laws establish minimum expectations that civil societies impose upon themselves.



If most Hunters were honest we could make a poll or get our figures like the DNR does to get true results.

 I would be willing to make a wager that MOST hunters Hunt over or trails near the plots they plant. I seriously doubt if 15% of hunters plant plots and never hunt the piece of property they plant..

As far as ethics goes your right. It's legal to drive 70 on the highway but most drive faster, Is it ethical to drive 72  verses 90? Both are breaking the law... Ethics aren't the same to each person. To some hunting with dogs is unethical to others it's there way of life and how they were raised up hunting.


----------



## JBowers

For those of you who didn't get to see the House debate on HB 277, you really should watch it regardless of your opinion/position.

Here's the video of the debate.  It starts at 1:28:15 (1 hour 28 minutes) into the following link:  http://mediam1.gpb.org/ga/leg/2011/ga-leg-house_031611_PM3.wmv


----------



## rex upshaw

Just 1 More said:


> If it's legal IT IS FAIR CHASE.. what part of that don't you understand??



The part where you say legal equals fair chase.


----------



## Twenty five ought six

JBowers said:


> For those of you who didn't get to see the House debate on HB 277, you really should watch it regardless of your opinion/position.



I watch if the first.

It really opened my eyes.

Who knew that hunting over bait was for the children?


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> The part where you say legal equals fair chase.



In this case.. it does ... crawl out from your rock and take a breath of fresh air


----------



## rex upshaw

Just 1 More said:


> In this case.. it does ... crawl out from your rock and take a breath of fresh air



So it doesn't always apply? When you say "in this case it does", is that because it applies to how you want to hunt?

How about being able to legally shoot a turkey with a high power rifle, still fair chase?


----------



## georgiabow

rex upshaw said:


> How about being able to legally shoot a turkey with a high power rifle, still fair chase?



id take up turkey hunting then.


----------



## kmckinnie

You can shoot one with a muzzel loader in Ga, Just telling whats in the Regs!

Isee yall still at it!


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> So it doesn't always apply? When you say "in this case it does", is that because it applies to how you want to hunt?
> 
> How about being able to legally shoot a turkey with a high power rifle, still fair chase?



Does not affect me in any way.. 

and Yes.. in states where it is legal


----------



## rex upshaw

Just 1 More said:


> and Yes.. in states where it is legal



That's all I needed to know.


----------



## Randy

There is a post under the deer hunting forum about hunter education.  Got me to thinking.  With the price of corn on the increase should the WRD or somebody offer baiting education?  I hate to see all this corn going to waste and just feeding pests.

At a minimum maybe GON could do and educational article on it.


----------



## kmckinnie

Great Idea! a stricky on how to feed! Thanks Randy


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> So it doesn't always apply? When you say "in this case it does", is that because it applies to how you want to hunt?
> 
> How about being able to legally shoot a turkey with a high power rifle, still fair chase?



If it's legal why does it matter the size piece of lead that kills the bird? call him in and kill him. I think your just not happy with anything unless it's your way. For the record I could care less about turkey hunting.


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> That's all I needed to know.



Does this mean we're not friends


----------



## rex upshaw

270 guy said:


> If it's legal why does it matter the size piece of lead that kills the bird? call him in and kill him. I think your just not happy with anything unless it's your way. For the record I could care less about turkey hunting.



Shooting one at 200 yards is not calling him in.


----------



## nickel back

ok.....


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> Shooting one at 200 yards is not calling him in.



LOL You are grasping at straws now. I never mentioned anything about 200 yards you did. Like I said your never happy unless it's your way or your idea from the looks of your posts. Hunt the way that works for you and stop worrying how others hunt and you will be much happier and enjoy it much more.


----------



## BERN

My final thoughts on the matter are this.
No one is going to convince anyone else on here to see it their way.

If the bill passes into law I will find a way to hunt according to my convictions. What I will have a very hard time swallowing is if it is voted into law and signed by Deal without the hunter's voice represented. They should have to stand up and say who they are representing with their vote. If you have responded to this thread then please take the step of contacting your state Senators and the Governor's office and letting them know how you feel and that you want it stated publicly that they are representing you when they vote. It is the way our country is supposed to work.

I appreciate that the folks that have disagreed with me have been respectful on here. Thank you.


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> Shooting one at 200 yards is not calling him in.



Hmmmm.. I've never tried that .. all my turkey kills have been within 30 yards and some with a bow ... But you go on and keep assuming you know who you're talking about


----------



## Catdaddy SC

I'm sure most of us here have no problem putting a cricket or worm on a hook and catching a bream. Deer and bream are both game animals.

The difference is the value you place on that particular animal.


----------



## G Duck

If some folks cant equate the planting of a food plot with setting out a feeder and keeping it full of corn, then this is never going to end. If the food plot seems to make you feel that you are detatched from "baiting" an animal, so be it. In my book, it is all the same. The feeder has a certain Taboo about it becouse it is Illegal. Some might argue that it is easier, quicker etc. I think it takes more effort and money to maintain a feeder or feed trough year round. In the end, whichever you do, you are still shooting an animal over a food source that was put in place for that purpose. To each his own.


----------



## UYD4L

JBowers said:


> It would seem to me that no person knows why MOST hunters plant wildlife openings and whether there are enough hunters sharing any one reason as to quantify the purpose.
> 
> Legality does not necessarily equate ethics, morality, or fair chase.  It could be argued that laws establish minimum expectations that civil societies impose upon themselves.



I would have to disagree. I think 99.9 percent if not all _hunters_ who plant food plots do it for the same reason: to improve their hunting conditions.  Even if you don't sit on or near the plot you most likely planted it to hoping to increase the quantity and/or quality of game on your property.  And you did so not because you just love animals and want them to be healthy, but because you hope that it will improve your hunting.  

Some might be hoping to shoot a deer right in the patch.  Some might be hoping to shoot a deer in the woods thats been eating in the patch at night.  Either way the plot was grown for the same general purpose.  Improved hunting conditions.  

The issue is whether it is ethical to shoot a deer within 200 yds and in sight of certain man-placed food sources.  I don't see how the nutritional benefit of clover or the time it takes a food plot to grow effect the morality of the issue.

Don't expect to change anyone's mind.  Just saying.


----------



## Jim Thompson

dear lord does it ever end?  

I could mention that I'm glad I moved up here where folks are @ least a little more laid back about the way others do or dont hunt and heck the laws here are way more restrictive.

this debate has been going on in GA for as long as weve been hunting and it will probably never end.  

I can tell you that back in the good ole days I was on the side of the no baiting crowd and couldnt be swayed...until I made a mistake and ventured out and hunted a few other states that allowed it.  what I saw opened my eyes and made me understand that its all still hunting, whether hunting a hot acorn tree or a hot line of corn (which we do both in states that allow baiting!). I saw the folks hunting as hard or harder in those states as we did back home.  I saw that those folks were just regular joes that wanted food for the table or a beast on the wall or both.  I saw that the public didnt care one way or the other as long as folks were bein legal. I saw that those folks KNEW that their way of hunting was right, just like back in good ole GA we KNEW that our way was right.

funny thing is yet again this year I witnessed how a hot acorn tree is much better than corn or beans.  we watched them time and time again ignore cut corn or bean fields to hot the acorns until they finally exhausted the woods.

although I dont have a dog in the fight anymore, I still never wished baiting on GA, but for different reasons than most of yall it seems.  My issue with it has always been how much it changes the hunting landscape and not about my personal morals or ethics...which I vowed way back when to NEVER push onto others.

like I said the debate never ends and all I can offer is for yall to try and hunt like you like while staying legal.


----------



## rex upshaw

Just 1 More said:


> Hmmmm.. I've never tried that .. all my turkey kills have been within 30 yards and some with a bow ... But you go on and keep assuming you know who you're talking about



who made the assumption i was talking about you?  i was speaking more to the fact that up until this year, in florida, you could use a rifle to kill turkey's on wma's and that plenty of people were doing it.  yes, it was legal, but no, that is not fair chase.  not only is it unsafe, but it is a joke.  no hunting skill is involved in shooting a bird from that distance, with a rifle.  now you can argue that you have to be a good shot, but the hunter argument is out the window.


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> who made the assumption i was talking about you?  i was speaking more to the fact that up until this year, in florida, you could use a rifle to kill turkey's on wma's and that plenty of people were doing it.  yes, it was legal, but no, that is not fair chase.  not only is it unsafe, but it is a joke.  no hunting skill is involved in shooting a bird from that distance, with a rifle.  now you can argue that you have to be a good shot, but the hunter argument is out the window.



Doesn't take much of a hunter to kill a deer 300 yards out in a clear cut with a rifle.. or on a powerline right of way.. just a good shooter..


----------



## rex upshaw

Just 1 More said:


> Doesn't take much of a hunter to kill a deer 300 yards out in a clear cut with a rifle.. or on a powerline right of way.. just a good shooter..



wow, we agree again.


----------



## G Duck

Still Hunting vs Dog Hunting
Longbow vs Recurve
Recurve vs Compound
Compound vs Crossbow
Bow vs Gun
Trophy Hunter vs Meat Hunter
Private land Turkeys vs Public land Turkeys
Rage vs Every Broadhead ever made.
.223 vs .243
Baiting vs Non Baiting

Gotta love the internet.


----------



## badfaulkner

nickel back said:


> Proponents of baiting say it allows hunters to be more selective, helping them avoid harvesting immature bucks. However, South Carolina currently has the highest harvest rate of yearling bucks in the nation. 65% of bucks harvested in South Carolina are yearlings. Apparently, baiting hasn't helped S.C. hunters be more selective.



I haven't read that study; does it say if the bulk of the yearling deer were killed in the lower state where baiting and dog driving is legal or is it in the upstate where those practices aren't? Does it specify?

Less bucks are killed in the lower state, btw.  Some say it's because we're worse hunters over corn.  Sure, fine.  It can't be because we let more yearlings and two year olds walk.  

Whatever reinforces your prejudices, sir.  Carry on.


----------



## badfaulkner

rex upshaw said:


> How horrible it must be to not get your way, every time you sit in the deer stand. They will have to learn that real life doesn't mirror this idea.



Rex, I grew up without hunting in camo or tree stands, with one buck tag a year, and a lottery for one doe tag per family.  

What's my point, you ask? You're assuming a heckuva' lot about folks who sometimes bait for deer, lumping us all in the instant gratification barrel. 

Every wild hog I've killed has been on unbaited WMA and I have indeed killed many whitetails without the aid of bait and even without the aid of tree stands, camo, buck lure, decoys, food plots, etc, etc, etc...

Don't assume we're bad hunters and bad parents, kind sir, just because our method isn't yours.  Some of us guys who choose to bait on some of our hunt sites could give you a serious run for your hunting money or a serious challenge in a parenting comparison.  

That said, I have many friends who don't bait and I respect their decision but I will always challenge their assumptions and comfort zone pertaining to sweeping generalizations.


----------



## Throwback

badfaulkner said:


> I haven't read that study; does it say if the bulk of the yearling deer were killed in the lower state where baiting and dog driving is legal or is it in the upstate where those practices aren't? Does it specify?



 




T


----------



## badfaulkner

GA DAWG said:


> Its a step..I'll guarentee its helping.. Does Bama have it? Does South Carolina have it? Tennessee? North Carolina? Florida? We kill bigger deer than they do! A lot bigger now that one has to have 4 on one side..



It's a bad step imo.  No offense.  Limits, yes.  Antler restrictions? No.  Let a hunter decide what his own trophy is.   Give SC a 2 to 4 buck limit -- depending on region/deer pop -- and enough bucks will grow to get big antlers that way.  I guarantee it.  Guys who kill 8-12 deer each fall will have to be more selective or stop after the 4th yearling.   

But an antler restriction is a de facto deer limit on our WMA's where it's mandatory (Woodbury, Webb, Palachucola, Hamilton Ridge).  It has it's place in SC management but imo should not be a statewide law.


----------



## 270 guy

Catdaddy SC said:


> I'm sure most of us here have no problem putting a cricket or worm on a hook and catching a bream. Deer and bream are both game animals.
> 
> The difference is the value you place on that particular animal.



I'm fixin to place some serious value on some worms that better attract some nice bream this afternoon or I will be done with baiting fish for a while.


----------



## emusmacker

rex upshaw said:


> Shooting one at 200 yards is not calling him in.



So let me get this staright, you think that shooting a turkey with a rifle has no skill and that person is a shooter, not a hunter?  If that be the case, then do you use anything other than a shotgun with buckshot or a bow to "hunt" deer with?  If you use a rifle, then Rex, you become a shooter like 98% of the rest of us HUNTERS.  If you don't then you have a valid arguement. Otherwise man, you're just spitting in the wind.  

I understand your dislike for the baiting issue, but if you research it and look back thru time, even our forefathers baited some. And were always looking for the ways to improve their chances at killing an animal. You don't have the right to tell any other person who is or isn't ethical as far as hunting goes if that person is not breaking the law.
Just because Rex don't do it, don't make it unethical.


----------



## emusmacker

Also, it's amazing to me the mindset of some folks that are supposed to be very knowledgable on the subject of deer hunting, that to assume now the deer population is going to decrease. I ask ....are you serious, for real?  That's is about the dumbest assumption I've heard. How will it deplete the herd, most deer become nocturnal when pressured anyway, regardless whether they're being hunted in the deep woods or over a bait plot, pressure= nocturnal. Simple really.

And Randy, I think the WRD should offer classes on "Hunting Styles In the 20th Century". That way some might could keep up.


----------



## nickel back

badfaulkner said:


> I haven't read that study; does it say if the bulk of the yearling deer were killed in the lower state where baiting and dog driving is legal or is it in the upstate where those practices aren't? Does it specify?
> 
> Less bucks are killed in the lower state, btw.  Some say it's because we're worse hunters over corn.  Sure, fine.  It can't be because we let more yearlings and two year olds walk.
> 
> Whatever reinforces your prejudices, sir.  Carry on.



take a breath its ok......

if you would like to know,read a way.....

http://www.wideerhunters.org/articles/SCbaitstudy.pdf


----------



## rex upshaw

Do you turkey hunt?



emusmacker said:


> So let me get this staright, you think that shooting a turkey with a rifle has no skill and that person is a shooter, not a hunter?  If that be the case, then do you use anything other than a shotgun with buckshot or a bow to "hunt" deer with?  If you use a rifle, then Rex, you become a shooter like 98% of the rest of us HUNTERS.  If you don't then you have a valid arguement. Otherwise man, you're just spitting in the wind.
> 
> I understand your dislike for the baiting issue, but if you research it and look back thru time, even our forefathers baited some. And were always looking for the ways to improve their chances at killing an animal. You don't have the right to tell any other person who is or isn't ethical as far as hunting goes if that person is not breaking the law.
> Just because Rex don't do it, don't make it unethical.


----------



## fredw

All I can say is WOW.

I've been gone for three days and just checked back in.  The same discussion, by the same people, trying to make the same points, and still no one listening.  All of the internet blabber isn't going to change a thing.  If you feel strongly about the issue, either way, you will be much more effective taking the time you're spending here and spend it getting in touch with your state Senator.   

To all on both sides of the fence, you aren't changing anyone's opinion......and there are other threads on the forum that might be able to use some insight.


----------



## Just 1 More

fredw said:


> All I can say is WOW.
> 
> I've been gone for three days and just checked back in.  The same discussion, by the same people, trying to make the same points, and still no one listening.  All of the internet blabber isn't going to change a thing.  If you feel strongly about the issue, either way, you will be much more effective taking the time you're spending here and spend it getting in touch with your state Senator.
> 
> To all on both sides of the fence, you aren't changing anyone's opinion......and there are other threads on the forum that might be able to use some insight.



I honestly don't think anyone is trying to change anyones opinion.. I know i'm not.. i'm just here having fun with it 
I'm still going to hunt the way I feel I want to .. not yours or anyone elses way


----------



## hunter8850

Just because HB 277 passed does not mean you have to participate. If you feel like it is not for you, then don't do it?


----------



## Michael Lee

Jim Thompson said:


> dear lord does it ever end?
> 
> I could mention that I'm glad I moved up here where folks are @ least a little more laid back about the way others do or dont hunt and heck the laws here are way more restrictive.
> 
> this debate has been going on in GA for as long as weve been hunting and it will probably never end.
> 
> I can tell you that back in the good ole days I was on the side of the no baiting crowd and couldnt be swayed...until I made a mistake and ventured out and hunted a few other states that allowed it.  what I saw opened my eyes and made me understand that its all still hunting, whether hunting a hot acorn tree or a hot line of corn (which we do both in states that allow baiting!). I saw the folks hunting as hard or harder in those states as we did back home.  I saw that those folks were just regular joes that wanted food for the table or a beast on the wall or both.  I saw that the public didnt care one way or the other as long as folks were bein legal. I saw that those folks KNEW that their way of hunting was right, just like back in good ole GA we KNEW that our way was right.
> 
> funny thing is yet again this year I witnessed how a hot acorn tree is much better than corn or beans.  we watched them time and time again ignore cut corn or bean fields to hot the acorns until they finally exhausted the woods.
> 
> although I dont have a dog in the fight anymore, I still never wished baiting on GA, but for different reasons than most of yall it seems.  My issue with it has always been how much it changes the hunting landscape and not about my personal morals or ethics...which I vowed way back when to NEVER push onto others.
> 
> like I said the debate never ends and all I can offer is for yall to try and hunt like you like while staying legal.



Amen JT and ditto from me!


----------



## bull0ne

Jim Thompson said:


> dear lord does it ever end?
> 
> I could mention that I'm glad I moved up here where folks are @ least a little more laid back about the way others do or dont hunt and heck the laws here are way more restrictive.
> 
> this debate has been going on in GA for as long as weve been hunting and it will probably never end.
> 
> I can tell you that back in the good ole days I was on the side of the no baiting crowd and couldnt be swayed...until I made a mistake and ventured out and hunted a few other states that allowed it.  what I saw opened my eyes and made me understand that its all still hunting, whether hunting a hot acorn tree or a hot line of corn (which we do both in states that allow baiting!). I saw the folks hunting as hard or harder in those states as we did back home.  I saw that those folks were just regular joes that wanted food for the table or a beast on the wall or both.  I saw that the public didnt care one way or the other as long as folks were bein legal. I saw that those folks KNEW that their way of hunting was right, just like back in good ole GA we KNEW that our way was right.
> 
> funny thing is yet again this year I witnessed how a hot acorn tree is much better than corn or beans.  we watched them time and time again ignore cut corn or bean fields to hot the acorns until they finally exhausted the woods.
> 
> although I dont have a dog in the fight anymore, I still never wished baiting on GA, but for different reasons than most of yall it seems.  My issue with it has always been how much it changes the hunting landscape and not about my personal morals or ethics...which I vowed way back when to NEVER push onto others.
> 
> like I said the debate never ends and all I can offer is for yall to try and hunt like you like while staying legal.




I'm proud you escaped hotlanta & GON before you were hopelessly corrupted.

And no....... pointless rants over the baiting topic will never end here. 

Good post.......coming from an informed point of view as well.


----------



## fredw

Just 1 More said:


> I honestly don't think anyone is trying to change anyones opinion.. I know i'm not.. i'm just here having fun with it
> I'm still going to hunt the way I feel I want to .. not yours or anyone elses way



Are you saying you're just talking to be talking?


----------



## Just 1 More

fredw said:


> Are you saying you're just talking to be talking?



Read it again.. I said EXACTLY why i'm here


----------



## 270 guy

Just 1 More said:


> I honestly don't think anyone is trying to change anyones opinion.. I know i'm not.. i'm just here having fun with it
> I'm still going to hunt the way I feel I want to .. not yours or anyone elses way



 To both answers.


----------



## LEON MANLEY

I think everybody should put out corn and hunt over it.

It's kinda like cruising with the traffic on I 285 that is a 55 mph zone but everybody is running in excess of 80 mph.

The GSP can't get everybody.

 How will the DNR be able to stake out every baited stand?

Live life on the wild side............chances were made for taking.


----------



## deermeat270

I think this thread should be moved to the Political Forum.  This has nothing to do with hunting and everything to do with politics.


----------



## SELFBOW

badfaulkner said:


> Give SC a 2 to 4 buck limit -- depending on region/deer pop -- and enough bucks will grow to get big antlers that way.  I guarantee it



Really You got any scientific evidence to back that claim up with?


And why do so if you wanna let the hunter decide what a trophy is?


----------



## Marlin_444

Stick a fork in it...  DANG...


----------



## glynr329

Has anyone figured out how many bags of corn or protein food it is going to take to keep your feeders full and how many months out of the year will you be feeding the deer? I figure once the feeder is empty the deer will find another feeder right? So if you want to keep the deer there you better keep the food there.

I am just trying to get some idea how much it is going to cost? I figure the guy that buys a bag of corn the day before season and pours it out will maybe get lucky and shot a deer. The guy that is feeding all year with high protein food has much better chance right? I can hear it now the guys next door has all the deer. 

I guess that will be another argument for another day.


----------



## Scrub Buck

Guess we'll see if it passes first.  Some food for thought thought for those that do support it....On a 2000 acre club that already has five established bait stations and five more mineral lick stations.  All maitained for the deers well being mind you.  Lets just add ten or twelve club maintained food plots for good measure.  This club has, I don't know twenty members?  It's a  large mast year and 15 members have fed the deer at their bait stations everything from pumkins, sugar beets, turnips, gords, and cabbage prior to and leading up to the season.  Some by the bag others by what their pickup could hold.  The night before three members pull up with all their pickups loaded down with cabbage and watermelons that they got for free.  Off they go with most of the herd enhancing tasty goods.  Opening day turned to the end of the season.  Your were pumped about your up and coming prospects of allowing it , yet you saw the least amount of deer that you ever have?  You supported legalized unlimited baiting.  Who should you blame?  If you don't think it will happen, your wrong.


----------



## kmckinnie

If they bring all that stuff for the deer to eat! They just might see me there at lunch time!


----------



## Just 1 More

cabbage and watermelons ????? Seriously???


----------



## buckfiddy

Just 1 More said:


> cabbage and watermelons ????? Seriously???



My uncle use to grow watermelons to sell, he lost a lot of melons to deer. They would stomp them and bust them up and eat the inside. Don't know that I would want to depend on melons as my bait though.


----------



## Throwback

Scrub Buck said:


> Guess we'll see if it passes first.  Some food for thought thought for those that do support it....On a 2000 acre club that already has five established bait stations and five more mineral lick stations.  All maitained for the deers well being mind you.  Lets just add ten or twelve club maintained food plots for good measure.  This club has, I don't know twenty members?  It's a  large mast year and 15 members have fed the deer at their bait stations everything from pumkins, sugar beets, turnips, gords, and cabbage prior to and leading up to the season.  Some by the bag others by what their pickup could hold.  The night before three members pull up with all their pickups loaded down with cabbage and watermelons that they got for free.  Off they go with most of the herd enhancing tasty goods.  Opening day turned to the end of the season.  Your were pumped about your up and coming prospects of allowing it , yet you saw the least amount of deer that you ever have?  You supported legalized unlimited baiting.  Who should you blame?  If you don't think it will happen, your wrong.





THat's not how baiting deer works. they don't swarm it like buzzards do a dead animal. 



T


----------



## Catdaddy SC

Scrub Buck said:


> It's a  large mast year and 15 members have fed the deer at their bait stations everything from pumkins, sugar beets, turnips, gords, and cabbage prior to and leading up to the season.  Some by the bag others by what their pickup could hold.  The night before three members pull up with all their pickups loaded down with cabbage and watermelons that they got for free.  Off they go with most of the herd enhancing tasty goods.  Opening day turned to the end of the season.  Your were pumped about your up and coming prospects of allowing it , yet you saw the least amount of deer that you ever have?  You supported legalized unlimited baiting.  Who should you blame?  If you don't think it will happen, your wrong.




If bait/supplemental food is improperly put out as an attractant, it will do just like you say and there are studies to back it up. I used to do the same thing and my trail cameras verified this.

For those who will be just starting with bait,don't do like 98% of the others do and put out 24/7,......it will make them nocturnal on a preferred food source.

Here's some examples with hogs, which are normally nocturnal just like deer. We set our feeders on 8 seconds in the afternoon and 3 seconds in the morning. 

I put the turkey photo in just because it looked good. What is important is noting the raccoon picture and the boar in the am. Normally daytime movement of raccoons means rabies, but that's not the case. If he waits until nightime, he won't get any corn. Same for the boar,....the young pigs will get it all before him, if he waits. We get all kind of daylight visits from normally nocturnal animals.


----------



## Scrub Buck

Just cut the watermelons in half prior to placing them.  Deer love the same thing we do.  Cabbage just throw the head out there.  They will figure it out.  Never did it myself.  Just hunted in a state that allowed it on a unlimited basis many years ago.  They no longer do.  It is now limited.  By the way, that state would be Michigan.


----------



## kmckinnie

They do like to eat watermelon vines! Turnips and collard greens!
And I love backstrap! Had it to nite off of one of my fla bow kills! Yes I shot it with my bow over a winter food plot!
If you think about it! It makes more sence to sit there! They come from everywhere to eat there! And I want to eat one of them! I could sit in the woods on a trial and take a chance, I'll take my chance at the eating spot that I prepared for them! Some of you can talk about it ifyou want! I don't care!
Fried backstrap,Blackeye peas rice and gravy from the meat!
I grow a garden every year to eat from! I grew-up on a farm we raised our food! 
I raise deer to eat! If they eat good,well then I eat good! 
Make fun of me I don't care and if you don't want to shake my hand,Well thats o k two! I know my family will be proud at DINNER TIME!  I love to hunt for food!


****This message was brought to you from a deer farmer!****


----------



## 270 guy

Catdaddy SC said:


> If bait/supplemental food is improperly put out as an attractant, it will do just like you say and there are studies to back it up. I used to do the same thing and my trail cameras verified this.
> 
> For those who will be just starting with bait,don't do like 98% of the others do and put out 24/7,......it will make them nocturnal on a preferred food source.
> 
> Here's some examples with hogs, which are normally nocturnal just like deer. We set our feeders on 8 seconds in the afternoon and 3 seconds in the morning.
> 
> I put the turkey photo in just because it looked good. What is important is noting the raccoon picture and the boar in the am. Normally daytime movement of raccoons means rabies, but that's not the case. If he waits until nightime, he won't get any corn. Same for the boar,....the young pigs will get it all before him, if he waits. We get all kind of daylight visits from normally nocturnal animals.


If you want to train them to come in at certain times, only let the feeder go off for 1 to 2 seconds each time that way your not just wasting feed and the animals will know they have to come eat when the feed is there. We did this in west FL in the past it works there. Here we just scatter it and have never had an issue with it. DO NOT pile it up they don't like it that way and it will mold and mildew if it doesn't get eatin fast enough.


----------



## Throwback

I bet that little spotted one on the left in the last pic would eat good. 

T


----------



## kmckinnie

Throwback said:


> I bet that little spotted one on the left in the last pic would eat good.
> 
> T



Tasty looken


----------



## emusmacker

rex upshaw said:


> Do you turkey hunt?



Yep, I do. Going sat am with my 9 yr old son.  Hunting with a 20 gauge, and when the gobbler comes to within 40 yars, then I'll SHOOT him with my modern firearm. Also plan on hunting turkey with my lond bow.   


Do you turkey hunt?


----------



## rex upshaw

emusmacker said:


> Yep, I do. Going sat am with my 9 yr old son.  Hunting with a 20 gauge, and when the gobbler comes to within 40 yars, then I'll SHOOT him with my modern firearm. Also plan on hunting turkey with my lond bow.
> 
> 
> Do you turkey hunt?



So how can you argue that taking a long range shot with a rifle, hunting?


----------



## Just 1 More

rex upshaw said:


> So how can you argue that taking a long range shot with a rifle, hunting?




I thought this was about baiting?????


----------



## kmckinnie

I've shot them with a rifle in Fla,200yds is a close shot for me! I like it at 400 to 600yds that a challenge! Beats shooting ground hogs for fun! I like to watch the feather fly!


----------



## emusmacker

Same as taking a long range shot with a rifle at a deer, or taking a 70 yd shot with a bow. 

so you never answered my first question, do you shoot deer with a rifle?  or do you hunt them with a rifle.

I HUNT deer, turkeys and waterfowl, then shoot them with a gun or bow. How long a shot I take doesn't matter, they're just as dead at 50 yards as they are at 350. So explain to me and ohters on here just exactly your definition of HUNTING.


----------



## kmckinnie

This has to do with deer feed! Does it work?
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=95215&highlight=


----------



## 270 guy

emusmacker said:


> Same as taking a long range shot with a rifle at a deer, or taking a 70 yd shot with a bow.
> 
> so you never answered my first question, do you shoot deer with a rifle?  or do you hunt them with a rifle.
> 
> I HUNT deer, turkeys and waterfowl, then shoot them with a gun or bow. How long a shot I take doesn't matter, they're just as dead at 50 yards as they are at 350. So explain to me and ohters on here just exactly your definition of HUNTING.



This aught to be good.


----------



## kmckinnie

Looks like a good foodplot seed!
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=136220&highlight=


----------



## kmckinnie

270 guy said:


> No y'all didn't dig this up.
> 
> I thought Rex didn't agree with bait, Plots or feed only native food sources?



I was shocked!

Theres more


----------



## 270 guy

kmckinnie said:


> This has to do with deer feed! Does it work?
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=95215&highlight=





kmckinnie said:


> Looks like a good foodplot seed!
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=136220&highlight=



 No y'all didn't dig this up. 

I thought Rex didn't agree with bait, Plots or feed..... only native food sources?


----------



## emusmacker

270 guy said:


> No y'all didn't dig this up.
> 
> I thought Rex didn't agree with bait, Plots or feed..... only native food sources?



Wonder how he will try and explain this one.  don't you just hate it when you get B U S T E D?

He still hasn't answered my question of what he considers hunting.


----------



## kmckinnie

270 guy said:


> No y'all didn't dig this up.
> 
> I thought Rex didn't agree with bait, Plots or feed..... only native food sources?



Some one is fixen to hit delete buttons!

Wonder now long before he sees it!

Does this stuff work? Thats allI want to know!


----------



## rex upshaw

I have never said that we do not occasionally plant food plots, but I do not hunt over them, as I like to get deep in the woods. We haven't planted a fall plot in 2 years. As for hunting with a rifle, I do more bow hunting these days, then I do rifle hunting.


----------



## rex upshaw

And as for supplemental feeding, yeah we've done it, but I fail to see how that has anything to do with hunting over bait.


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> I have never said that we do not occasionally plant food plots, but I do not hunt over them, as I like to get deep in the woods. We haven't planted a fall plot in 2 years. As for hunting with a rifle, I do more bow hunting these days, then I do rifle hunting.



Do you plant the bait/feed also? You told me you didn't hunt near bait or plots several times in different posts said you only hunt natural food sources. I guess none of these deer your hunting on these trails were heading to the bait or plots?

 Like I have said many times unless you plant it and don't hunt the property the plots are on there all the same BAIT PLOTS. 

This is all I have to say about this. You have proven my point or kmckinnie has proven it for us. Enjoy your hunt the way you like  and the rest will do the same as long as both are legal everyone is good.


----------



## rex upshaw

You are right 270, I don't hunt near, or over food plots. We have access to 1,000 acres, so there is plenty of area to hunt, nowhere close to a food plot. We sometimes plant spring plots and have only had protein pellets out after the season.


----------



## kmckinnie

rex upshaw said:


> You are right 270, I don't hunt near, or over food plots. We have access to 1,000 acres, so there is plenty of area to hunt, nowhere close to a food plot. We sometimes plant spring plots and have only had protein pellets out after the season.



Do yall have a stand at the foodplot sight! Or any of the foodplot sights! 1000 acres is not really that big!With 10 or more hunting there someone will be close! All of yall can't go wayyyyy wayyyyy down inthe woods!


----------



## rex upshaw

No, I'm not saying that plots haven't been planted during the season, they have. Have I hunted over a food plot before, yes I have, but don't anymore.


----------



## 270 guy

As the world turns so are the days of our lives.


----------



## rex upshaw

Kmckinnie, where have I said that nobody I hunt with has hunted over a food plot? I said none of us would hunt over a pile of corn. It is my choice to not hunt plots, coupled with the fact that we haven't planted a fall plot recently, so nobody else has recently.


----------



## G Duck

270 guy said:


> If you want to train them to come in at certain times, only let the feeder go off for 1 to 2 seconds each time that way your not just wasting feed and the animals will know they have to come eat when the feed is there. We did this in west FL in the past it works there. Here we just scatter it and have never had an issue with it. DO NOT pile it up they don't like it that way and it will mold and mildew if it doesn't get eatin fast enough.



Thats about all that we would feed here where I hunt. Im not spending $$$ to fatten up hogs. They will run the deer off of the feeders. I have a friend, whose club put hog fences up around all of their feeders. (about 15k acre lease)


----------



## shakey gizzard

Driveler?


----------



## mudracing101

shakey gizzard said:


> Driveler?



yep, 155 to go and they will have to shut her down


----------



## rex upshaw

G Duck said:


> Thats about all that we would feed here where I hunt. Im not spending $$$ to fatten up hogs. They will run the deer off of the feeders. I have a friend, whose club put hog fences up around all of their feeders. (about 15k acre lease)



I hate the idea of feeding hogs. A neighbor put out some corn last week andnit got hammered by pigs.


----------



## LonePine

270 guy said:


> *If you want to train them to* come in at certain times, only let the feeder go off for 1 to 2 seconds each time that way your not just wasting feed and the animals will know they have to come eat when the feed is there. We did this in west FL in the past it works there. Here we just scatter it and have never had an issue with it. DO NOT pile it up they don't like it that way and it will mold and mildew if it doesn't get eatin fast enough.



"Training deer" to come into a feeder at a certain time to be shot...... This is why I am against baiting and will never sit over a feeder.  

Your argument that food plots and poured out corn should be looked at the same way no longer holds any water.  When was the last time that you saw a deer trained to come to a food plot at a given time?????


----------



## mattb78

Trophy Hunters = worry that all the small bucks will be shot by meat hunters.

Non-baiters = worry that all the deer will be shot by baiters and/or they won't see any deer because their neighbors bait.

All of these prejudices boil down to harvest envy and the irrational fear there will be no deer left. There will be plenty of deer for everyone guys.  Trust the wildlife officials to properly manage herd size and limits (if you can get over your irrational fear and paranoia that they are in the pockets of insurance companies and want all deer in Georgia gone...)


----------



## G Duck

Saw where the bill is in the senate as "Read and Referred" not sure what step that is , or what it means. Cant figure out how to listen to live broadcast with a Mac.


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

mattb78 said:


> Trust the wildlife officials to properly manage herd size and limits (if you can get over your irrational fear and paranoia that they are in the pockets of insurance companies and want all deer in Georgia gone...)



I hope everyone will follow this advice! 

There would be no baiting to worry about.


----------



## 270 guy

Lance45lb said:


> "Training deer" to come into a feeder at a certain time to be shot...... This is why I am against baiting and will never sit over a feeder.
> 
> Your argument that food plots and poured out corn should be looked at the same way no longer holds any water.  When was the last time that you saw a deer trained to come to a food plot at a given time?????


 That's exactly why I used that word. You can't train a wild animal they will do whatthey want to do when they want to do it. Using a small amount of feed will keep from wasting feed and not allow every animal in the woods to eat up your bait. If you don't want to bait DO NOT DO IT. Pretty simple. 

As far as them both being the same scattered corn versus bait plots it holds plenty of water they both do the excat same thing. Feed Deer at any time they decide to eat.


----------



## tournament fisher

i am pleased with the decision to hunt the way you choose. i also do agree that now the game wardens can focus more on thug hunters and all the stealing that goes on every year of deer stands,4 wheelers,campers,etc.


----------



## badfaulkner

buckbacks said:


> Really You got any scientific evidence to back that claim up with?
> 
> 
> And why do so if you wanna let the hunter decide what a trophy is?



 Do the math:  if a guy who hunts a 40 acre tract or has a membership in a 4,000 acre club is used to killing 8-12 yearling bucks a season and can now only kill two bucks the entire season -- or 4 -- what choice will those bucks have but to die of natural causes or grow one more year? 

8 bucks with small antlers normally in his truck bed will be left alive or found dead on the highway.  Not scientific but simple arithmetic.  

Letting a hunter decide what a trophy is (statewide, not on club land where you or I pay money to manage harvest restrictions) is far more fair to the guy who may only kill 1 buck per season (if even that one!).  Traditional management is also deer hunting and there needs to be room in the hunting community for a hunter to choose a small buck if he wants.


----------



## LonePine

270 guy said:


> That's exactly why I used that word. You can't train a wild animal they will do whatthey want to do when they want to do it. Using a small amount of feed will keep from wasting feed and not allow every animal in the woods to eat up your bait. If you don't want to bait DO NOT DO IT. Pretty simple.
> 
> As far as them both being the same scattered corn versus bait plots it holds plenty of water they both do the excat same thing. Feed Deer at any time they decide to eat.



I've heard plenty of stories and seen plenty posted here about deer and hogs coming into the sound of a feeder going off.  I know people that run and hunt feeders in states where it is legal.  They set the timer to go off a certain times of the day (when they are normally in the treestand).  Why would they go to all this trouble if the deer are just going to come eat when they want to?

You are correct that a wild animal can't be trained but they can be conditioned to respond to certain events.


----------



## runswithbeer

Lance45lb said:


> I've heard plenty of stories and seen plenty posted here about deer and hogs coming into the sound of a feeder going off.  I know people that run and hunt feeders in states where it is legal.  They set the timer to go off a certain times of the day (when they are normally in the treestand).  Why would they go to all this trouble if the deer are just going to come eat when they want to?
> QUOTE]
> 
> i'm gonna set my timer 15 mins after i get home from work, that way it can go off and they'll comea runnin.  It will also save me the time of having to wait for them to come my oats.


----------



## rex upshaw

mattb78 said:


> Trophy Hunters = worry that all the small bucks will be shot by meat hunters.
> 
> Non-baiters = worry that all the deer will be shot by baiters and/or they won't see any deer because their neighbors bait.
> All of these prejudices boil down to harvest envy and the irrational fear there will be no deer left. There will be plenty of deer for everyone guys.  Trust the wildlife officials to properly manage herd size and limits (if you can get over your irrational fear and paranoia that they are in the pockets of insurance companies and want all deer in Georgia gone...)



that is not my issue at all, i just don't agree with the practice of baiting, as i don't see it as fair chase.  as for trusting the wildlife officials, i wish their advice would have been sought (and posted), prior to hb 277 going into action.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> as for trusting the wildlife officials, i wish their advice would have been sought (and posted), prior to hb 277 going into action.



Are these the same wildlife biologists that you all are complaing about, that they are setting and keeping the doe limit to high?  Seems like one minute you all are cussing them out for not knowing what they are doing and the next your are chiming in about how knowledgeable they are?  Which is it or does that depend on the argument you are having at that time.


----------



## Randy

shdw633 said:


> Are these the same wildlife biologists that you all are complaing about, that they are setting and keeping the doe limit to high?  Seems like one minute you all are cussing them out for not knowing what they are doing and the next your are chiming in about how knowledgeable they are?  Which is it or does that depend on the argument you are having at that time.



I do not believe the doe limit was set by the biologists.  Just another time they were not listened to.


----------



## LonePine

Randy said:


> I do not believe the doe limit was set by the biologists.  Just another time they were not listened to.



X2; Deer season length and bag limits are set and voted on by the state legislature


----------



## emusmacker

Hey rex, please answer my question of what your definition of hunting is versus shooting. It can't be that hard to explain.


----------



## Friar Tuck

I have watched this sight for years but have never joined until now because of this issue.

I watched the debate closely the last time this came up a few years ago and wonder why it did not pass then.
I see the DNR does not support this but has not come up with a rational explaination as to why not?

They can't say it will harm the deer because if they did we would here about it in all the states that already allow it or we would have issues already do to supplemental feeding.

So why pray tell me do they oppose this every time?

Maybe a few of you brainy fellows will set me straight....


----------



## southgaoriginal

oh good lord people let it rest its here so get used to it.  Bait if you want or dont it is up to you.  It is not the end of the world as we know it


----------



## GA DAWG

Randy said:


> I do not believe the doe limit was set by the biologists.  Just another time they were not listened to.


They sure have got on here and defended the limit..Aint no way the senate members just came up with the number 12.


----------



## 270 guy

Lance45lb said:


> I've heard plenty of stories and seen plenty posted here about deer and hogs coming into the sound of a feeder going off.  I know people that run and hunt feeders in states where it is legal.  They set the timer to go off a certain times of the day (when they are normally in the treestand).  Why would they go to all this trouble if the deer are just going to come eat when they want to?
> 
> You are correct that a wild animal can't be trained but they can be conditioned to respond to certain events.



Friend you are cornfused sounds like. You said that scattered corn and bait plots are different because bait plots they can eat whenever and scattered corn they can't. Stop and go reread what you posted and what I replied to and you will see I am right. Scattered corn is available all day and night as are bait plots and native vegitation, they are all the same EXCEPT native vegitation isn't placed by man to attract a deer in for a kill shot. 

Timed feeders allow the animals to only eat when the feed is on the ground if you sling a lot they can eat anytime like scattered or plots if you sling a small amount they have to eat when it's available. The end result wanted to be achieved by the hunter is the same in each scenerio a DEAD DEER. If corn isn't for you that's fine it is for some folks and not for others.


----------



## shdw633

Randy said:


> I do not believe the doe limit was set by the biologists.  Just another time they were not listened to.



REALLY?!?!?!?  Your saying that the legislature took no information that the biologists were saying into consideration??!?!?!  REALLY??!?!?!  They just picked 12 out of a hat a ran with it.  Seriously you all just make this stuff up as you go along don't you.  Whatever it takes to make your argument at that time.  I suppose right now there is a large group of biologists locked up in a room somewhere trying to get out so they can spread the word of over-harvest and anti-baiting to the Georgia legislature, but some evil wrong doer (possibly going by the name of Snydley Cornbaiter, you know the guy, has an evil laugh that goes WHOOHAHAHAHA while he twirls his oversized mustache) has the key and won't let them out!!!


----------



## SELFBOW

badfaulkner said:


> Do the math:  if a guy who hunts a 40 acre tract or has a membership in a 4,000 acre club is used to killing 8-12 yearling bucks a season and can now only kill two bucks the entire season -- or 4 -- what choice will those bucks have but to die of natural causes or grow one more year?
> 
> 8 bucks with small antlers normally in his truck bed will be left alive or found dead on the highway.  Not scientific but simple arithmetic.
> 
> Letting a hunter decide what a trophy is (statewide, not on club land where you or I pay money to manage harvest restrictions) is far more fair to the guy who may only kill 1 buck per season (if even that one!).  Traditional management is also deer hunting and there needs to be room in the hunting community for a hunter to choose a small buck if he wants.



In other words you are dependant on the goverment to help you kill 1 buck cause you cannot do so on your own?

What business is it of yours if I kill 8 small bucks 150 miles from you? What effect will it have on you? Leave the "state" out of it and let the clubs manage as they see fit.


----------



## buckfiddy

southgaoriginal said:


> oh good lord people let it rest its here so get used to it.  Bait if you want or dont it is up to you.  It is not the end of the world as we know it



x2...Can't we all just get along? You hunt the way you want and let others hunt the way they want. My opinion all this fussing back and forth is a waste of time, you ain't going to change anyone's opinion about it.


----------



## Randy

shdw633 said:


> REALLY?!?!?!?  Your saying that the legislature took no information that the biologists were saying into consideration??!?!?! out!!!


yes.  Most legislators rarely listen to anybody without money.


----------



## Randy

On a side note, I have no problem with the limits.  I am surprised some of you do.  What happened to let people hunt/shoot/kill like they want?


----------



## tournament fisher

this post above is right, put up and let the corn feeders fly baby. it want be any different than any other state that does it. CORN IS KING LOL!!!!! YEA TO THE CORN FARMERS AND BUINESESS THAT SELL IT.


----------



## General Lee

.........


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

"And a child shall lead them"!

Makes sense, since "it's for the chiiiiiildreeeen"!


----------



## Throwback

In related news, shelled corn is now $9.99 per 50 pound bag at Tractor Supply. 


T


----------



## Spotlite

Throwback said:


> In related news, shelled corn is now $9.99 per 50 pound bag at Tractor Supply.
> 
> 
> T



Turkey season

GW cant see scratch feed though


----------



## nickel back

whats up!!


----------



## Throwback

nickel back said:


> whats up!!



corn prices!

T


----------



## nickel back

Throwback said:


> corn prices!
> 
> T



yep......,I hope it goes up to $20 bucks a bag


----------



## kmckinnie

nickel back said:


> yep......,I hope it goes up to $20 bucks a bag



I grow my own! 100 bushals a year just for deer!


----------



## nickel back

kmckinnie said:


> I grow my own! 100 bushals a year just for deer!



good for you.....


----------



## kmckinnie

Thankyou nickel!


----------



## mudracing101

Corn prices did not go up cause of deer. Somebody decided to make gas out of it .


----------



## nickel back

kmckinnie said:


> Thankyou nickel!



.....no problem.

Hey:

I bet sweat corn would work real good??

Im not a baiter but,its an idea maybe.


----------



## nickel back

mudracing101 said:


> Corn prices did not go up cause of deer. Somebody decided to make gas out of it .



not yet but,you watch when hunting season comes in,if that stupid HB 277 goes into law....yes sir!


----------



## mudracing101

nickel back said:


> not yet but,you watch when hunting season comes in,if that stupid HB 277 goes into law....yes sir!



We will just have to wait and see.


----------



## badfaulkner

buckbacks said:


> In other words you are dependant on the goverment to help you kill 1 buck cause you cannot do so on your own?



No, in other words, you've taken my post entirely out of context to get to a point I was not making.  

The question I was answering was "How do you know killing less bucks overall will result in more bucks growing to an older age to produce a more balanced deer herd age structure?"

You've helped answer his question, sir. The less yearling deer you are allowed to kill per season, the better chance they have of living to year two (or some other hunter with less recreational time than you has of killing one).  

If I'm government reliant on limits out of selfishness (in your opinion), wouldn't that make you government reliant on being a game hog? 

I'm not calling you that.  Just trying to get you to see it from the viewpoint of hunters who would like to see more bucks in their limited field time (me, my son, my uncle, my girlfriend, etc, etc, etc) or the guys who do want to see more 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks running around who made it through year one.  It's not about QDM but limits in South Carolina WILL increase the age structure of the deer herd.  It will be an unintended benefit.


----------



## FlipKing

when is the senate supposed to vote on it? Right now the senate site says "read and referred"


----------



## 270 guy

mudracing101 said:


> Corn prices did not go up cause of deer. Somebody decided to make gas out of it .



EXACTLY! Some don't understand that though.


----------



## 270 guy

nickel back said:


> not yet but,you watch when hunting season comes in,if that stupid HB 277 goes into law....yes sir!



 Is GA the magical state that is going to make it go up? It hasn't gone up in all the other states that allow bait until the past year or two when they started making fuel out of corn.


----------



## rex upshaw

emusmacker said:


> Hey rex, please answer my question of what your definition of hunting is versus shooting. It can't be that hard to explain.



Depends on the game. I don't consider shooting long range with a rifle, for turkeys, as hunting, just as I don't view shooting a dove off a power line, a quail off the ground etc. Long range hunting for deer isn't my thing, as I like to get in close and I think 300+ yd shots are more about being a good shot, then being a good hunter. Certainly the two can coexist, but I think it's takes some of the hunting out of it and you are relying more on your skills as a shooter, than your woodsmanship. As it relates to deer, I just don't want to jeopardize injuring a deer.


----------



## Throwback

Anybvody else ever wonder why it's "unethical" to shoot a dove when it's sitting on a wire, but you are much more likely to make a clean kill that way than when you shoot it flying and knock feathers off it but don't kill it?

Why don't we consider it "unethical" to shoot a deer standing still rather than running also?




T


----------



## PWalls

Throwback said:


> Anybvody else ever wonder why it's "unethical" to shoot a dove when it's sitting on a wire, but you are much more likely to make a clean kill that way than when you shoot it flying and knock feathers off it but don't kill it?
> 
> Why don't we consider it "unethical" to shoot a deer standing still rather than running also?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T



Hey T, bet the number of button bucks taking a dirt nap will increase. Hard to tell the difference when looking at the face if they are down in a yellow pile.


----------



## Friar Tuck

Throwback said:


> Anybvody else ever wonder why it's "unethical" to shoot a dove when it's sitting on a wire, but you are much more likely to make a clean kill that way than when you shoot it flying and knock feathers off it but don't kill it?
> 
> Why don't we consider it "unethical" to shoot a deer standing still rather than running also?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T



Heck I don't know about you yankees ( North Georgia Boys ) but a lot of us guys down south shoot them on the run in front of our dogs.

So standing still or running makes no difference to us.


----------



## rex upshaw

The running issue is part of the reason I don't hunt deer with dogs. 



Throwback said:


> Anybvody else ever wonder why it's "unethical" to shoot a dove when it's sitting on a wire, but you are much more likely to make a clean kill that way than when you shoot it flying and knock feathers off it but don't kill it?
> 
> Why don't we consider it "unethical" to shoot a deer standing still rather than running also?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T


----------



## Spotlite

Its getting deep now.........................................


----------



## Throwback

rex upshaw said:


> The running issue is part of the reason I don't hunt deer with dogs.




do you shoot doves on the wing?

T


----------



## Randy

T,
I think you are on to something.  We should change all our laws to taking of animals only in the most humane way.  Gun size should be limited to 300 mag.  That gun kills instantly almost anywhere you shoot an animal.  Next we limit shot placement, head shots only.  Then we limit shots to only the perfect opportunity such as deer standing still with their heads in a pile of corn.  Doves on the wire.  Turkey on the roost.  Fish in a barrel. Hogs in a pen.  No wait let's limit all animals to being taken in a pen.


----------



## rex upshaw

Throwback said:


> do you shoot doves on the wing?
> 
> T



yes and i don't categorize dove and deer the same, although i see little sport in shooting a bird off a wire.   if we are talking about needing the food to survive and not the sporting aspect, i see your point.  if not, i have no clue what it is you are reaching for.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> T,
> I think you are on to something.  We should change all our laws to taking of animals only in the most humane way.  Gun size should be limited to 300 mag.  That gun kills instantly almost anywhere you shoot an animal.  Next we limit shot placement, head shots only.  Then we limit shots to only the perfect opportunity such as deer standing still with their heads in a pile of corn.  Doves on the wire.  Turkey on the roost.  Fish in a barrel. Hogs in a pen.  No wait let's limit all animals to being taken in a pen.



Your joking right? If not you really don't have a clue do you? It's funny how some just can't let it go.


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> Your joking right? If not you really don't have a clue do you? It's funny how some just can't let it go.



No I am not joking.  While I have never owned a 300 mag I have a friend who does.  He once shot a doe in the lower jaw.  She fell dead.  He shot a bucks leg off.  He fell dead.  It is the hammer of thor I tell you.

BTW, the 270 is a piece of crap!


----------



## kmckinnie

nickel back said:


> .....no problem.
> 
> Hey:
> 
> I bet sweat corn would work real good??
> 
> Im not a baiter but,its an idea maybe.



Sweet corn is good with backstrap! It doesn't dry out right for feed! What about protein pellets  do they work!
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=114652&highlight=
I think turnups work good in a food plotwhat do you think!
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=115463&highlight=

Now if you hunt over a food plot you need lime!
http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=115463&highlight=

Just ask the quetions and you will get help!

No sweetcorn is not a good choise! feild corn does that help you! You ol no baiter you!


----------



## brad2727

PWalls said:


> Hey T, bet the number of button bucks taking a dirt nap will increase. Hard to tell the difference when looking at the face if they are down in a yellow pile.



actually you are very wrong buddy!! I have watched a many doe and buck in the corn pile along with many button bucks through the years with the ole head down in the pile....thats actually when you can tell more about  them....its when i realized a many was buttons...just experience


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> No I am not joking.  While I have never owned a 300 mag I have a friend who does.  He once shot a doe in the lower jaw.  She fell dead.  He shot a bucks leg off.  He fell dead.  It is the hammer of thor I tell you.
> 
> BTW, the 270 is a piece of crap!


Forget the corn,you should be lobbying to legalize the use of hand grenades for your friend...........


----------



## Randy

General Lee said:


> Forget the corn,you should be lobbying to legalize the use of hand grenades for your friend...........



Why not since we're on the allow anybody to hunt the way they want to.


----------



## Throwback

rex upshaw said:


> yes and i don't categorize dove and deer the same, although i see little sport in shooting a bird off a wire.   if we are talking about needing the food to survive and not the sporting aspect, i see your point.  if not, i have no clue what it is you are reaching for.



I am asking all ya'll guardians of ethics why it is "ethical" to shoot a dove--or any animal-- in the manner in which it is more likely to be wounded. 

T


----------



## kmckinnie

Well it turkey season! Can I shoot one of them standing on the ground! Or do I wait for it to fly! Thanks


----------



## General Lee

Randy said:


> Why not since we're on the allow anybody to hunt the way they want to.


I'm all for it.Go to Atlanta,look for the big building with the gold roof and run it by them to see what they think...........


----------



## Throwback

kmckinnie said:


> Well it turkey season! Can I shoot one of them standing on the ground! Or do I wait for it to fly! Thanks



see? People WON'T shoot a turkey on the wing cause it is less likely to kill it...........


T


----------



## rex upshaw

Throwback said:


> I am asking all ya'll guardians of ethics why it is "ethical" to shoot a dove--or any animal-- in the manner in which it is more likely to be wounded.
> 
> T



If you don't understand the difference, at this stage of the game, I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> If you don't understand the difference, at this stage of the game, I don't know what to tell you.



I think that is the point he is trying to make to you.  YOU don't understand the difference at this stage of the game.  You and you alone are determining what is fair chase and/or what is right or wrong regardless of what anyone else suggests to you and yet you don't allow anyone else to have that same privilege.  By stating that you catagorize the animals you hunt in order to determine your level of ethics you are saying that all life must be viewed differently in order to fit into YOUR designation of fair chase, what makes a doves life any different than a deers life and therefore the rules (or ethics) for killing each of them different?  If it is ok with you to shoot a dove on the fly, then why not a deer?


----------



## SELFBOW

badfaulkner said:


> No, in other words, you've taken my post entirely out of context to get to a point I was not making.
> 
> The question I was answering was "How do you know killing less bucks overall will result in more bucks growing to an older age to produce a more balanced deer herd age structure?"
> 
> You've helped answer his question, sir. The less yearling deer you are allowed to kill per season, the better chance they have of living to year two (or some other hunter with less recreational time than you has of killing one).
> 
> If I'm government reliant on limits out of selfishness (in your opinion), wouldn't that make you government reliant on being a game hog?
> 
> I'm not calling you that.  Just trying to get you to see it from the viewpoint of hunters who would like to see more bucks in their limited field time (me, my son, my uncle, my girlfriend, etc, etc, etc) or the guys who do want to see more 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks running around who made it through year one.  It's not about QDM but limits in South Carolina WILL increase the age structure of the deer herd.  It will be an unintended benefit.



Go hunt somewhere else.
Noone needs your imposed restrictions placed on them because you want to see more. Spend the money and join a club that has those guidelines and it won't be a problem.
No need for you or anybody else to push for limits imposed on others statewide because you can't see deer when you are in the woods. Maybe some of these guys on here like Rex and Randy can teach you some woodsmanship...


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> No I am not joking.  While I have never owned a 300 mag I have a friend who does.  He once shot a doe in the lower jaw.  She fell dead.  He shot a bucks leg off.  He fell dead.  It is the hammer of thor I tell you.
> 
> BTW, the 270 is a piece of crap!



You just proved my point you really have no clue

 I have killed well over 50 deer with a 270 I also have killed them with a 300 mag and now hunt mainly with a 7 mag.

 The 300 has the same size piece of lead as a 30-30 30-06 308 and so on. The only difference is knock down power and speed. Many deer have died to a 243 caliber as well.

 You should stick to things you actually know about instead of going by what your brothers best friends uncle told you.


----------



## rex upshaw

How can you argue that shooting at a flying dove, with a shotgun, can be compared to taking a running shot at a deer? How many pellets are coming out of a shotgun shell compared to a centerfire round? a wounded dove will often either go down, or be shot by another hunter in the field. A wounded deer can run quite a ways, with little blood and the ability to recover the animal is quite low. In other words, you have many more things stacked in your favor while shooting a flying dove, than you do at a running deer. Length of shot must also be considered. It is up to the hunter to know their limitations, be it deer hunting, dove hunting, or any other type of hunting.




		Code:
	






shdw633 said:


> I think that is the point he is trying to make to you.  YOU don't understand the difference at this stage of the game.  You and you alone are determining what is fair chase and/or what is right or wrong regardless of what anyone else suggests to you and yet you don't allow anyone else to have that same privilege.  By stating that you catagorize the animals you hunt in order to determine your level of ethics you are saying that all life must be viewed differently in order to fit into YOUR designation of fair chase, what makes a doves life any different than a deers life and therefore the rules (or ethics) for killing each of them different?  If it is ok with you to shoot a dove on the fly, then why not a deer?


----------



## 270 guy

kmckinnie said:


> Sweet corn is good with backstrap! It doesn't dry out right for feed! What about protein pellets  do they work!
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=114652&highlight=
> I think turnups work good in a food plotwhat do you think!
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=115463&highlight=
> 
> Now if you hunt over a food plot you need lime!
> http://forum.gon.com/showthread.php?t=115463&highlight=
> 
> Just ask the quetions and you will get help!
> 
> No sweetcorn is not a good choise! feild corn does that help you! You ol no baiter you!



 Not another one  Some people


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> How can you argue that shooting at a flying dove, with a shotgun, can be compares to taking a running shot at a deer? How many pellets are coming out of a shotgun shell compared to a centerfire round?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:



What does that have to do with anything? A deer is a bit larger target then a dove. If your a good shot and feel comfortable with the shot take it. My biggest buck was killed running across a field. I have takin several deer running and walking.   I also have missed plenty of doves flying with number 7.5's.


----------



## rex upshaw

270 guy said:


> A deer is a bit larger target then a dove.



Clip a wing and there is a good chance you will recover the bird. However, shooting a deer in the rear, or gutshooting one and there is a good chance that you will not recover the animal and you put the deer at great risk of dying a slow death.


----------



## Randy

shdw633 said:


> I think that is the point he is trying to make to you.  YOU don't understand the difference at this stage of the game.  You and you alone are determining what is fair chase and/or what is right or wrong regardless of what anyone else suggests to you and yet you don't allow ....If it is ok with you to shoot a dove on the fly, then why not a deer?


Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.  Not a competitive sport as in one hunter against another but the hunter against the animal and their perticular challenge.  For does it is merely the challenge of hitting one of those fast flying devils on the wing.  There is no challenge to hit one on a wire.  The challenge in turkey hunting is to call the bird in reversing the natural actions of that gobbler to stand there and call you to him.  The challenge of deer hunting is finding and outsmarting that old doe or buck and get a shot close enough to make a clean kill.

As I have said before, what we have in our group today are two different types of people.  Hunters and shooters.  To hunters it is all about the challenge of hunting the game and taking them on their own terms.  The shooters care nothing about the challenge of the hunt.  They are there merely to kill something.  It matters not if they kill it sitting on a wire, on the roost, with it's head in a pile of corn.

Apparently the hunters will never understand the need to just shoot something by any means just to kill it.  Likewise the shooters do not understand the challenge of hunting.  The end result is all that matters.

Is either one any different than the other? No more different than feeders and food plots.  If you don't or can't understand the difference you are not a hunter you are a shooter.


----------



## SELFBOW

rex upshaw said:


> How can you argue that shooting at a flying dove, with a shotgun, can be compared to taking a running shot at a deer? How many pellets are coming out of a shotgun shell compared to a centerfire round? a wounded dove will often either go down, or be shot by another hunter in the field. A wounded deer can run quite a ways, with little blood and the ability to recover the animal is quite low. In other words, you have many more things stacked in your favor while shooting a flying dove, than you do at a running deer. Length of shot must also be considered. It is up to the hunter to know their limitations, be it deer hunting, dove hunting, or any other type of hunting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:




OMG


Randy said:


> Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.  Not a competitive sport as in one hunter against another but the hunter against the animal and their perticular challenge.  For does it is merely the challenge of hitting one of those fast flying devils on the wing.  There is no challenge to hit one on a wire.  The challenge in turkey hunting is to call the bird in reversing the natural actions of that gobbler to stand there and call you to him.  The challenge of deer hunting is finding and outsmarting that old doe or buck and get a shot close enough to make a clean kill.
> 
> As I have said before, what we have in our group today are two different types of people.  Hunters and shooters.  To hunters it is all about the challenge of hunting the game and taking them on their own terms.  The shooters care nothing about the challenge of the hunt.  They are there merely to kill something.  It matters not if they kill it sitting on a wire, on the roost, with it's head in a pile of corn.
> 
> Apparently the hunters will never understand the need to just shoot something by any means just to kill it.  Likewise the shooters do not understand the challenge of hunting.  The end result is all that matters.
> 
> Is either one any different than the other? No more different than feeders and food plots.  If you don't or can't understand the difference you are not a hunter you are a shooter.



OMGx2


----------



## JBowers

buckbacks said:


> No need for you or anybody else to push for limits imposed on others statewide because you can't see deer when you are in the woods. ...


 
Just like folks clamoring for a bag limit reduction or reduction in either-sex days...


----------



## Pointpuller

Randy said:


> Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.  Not a competitive sport as in one hunter against another but the hunter against the animal and their perticular challenge.  For does it is merely the challenge of hitting one of those fast flying devils on the wing.  There is no challenge to hit one on a wire.  The challenge in turkey hunting is to call the bird in reversing the natural actions of that gobbler to stand there and call you to him.  The challenge of deer hunting is finding and outsmarting that old doe or buck and get a shot close enough to make a clean kill.
> 
> As I have said before, what we have in our group today are two different types of people.  Hunters and shooters.  To hunters it is all about the challenge of hunting the game and taking them on their own terms.  The shooters care nothing about the challenge of the hunt.  They are there merely to kill something.  It matters not if they kill it sitting on a wire, on the roost, with it's head in a pile of corn.
> 
> Apparently the hunters will never understand the need to just shoot something by any means just to kill it.  Likewise the shooters do not understand the challenge of hunting.  The end result is all that matters.
> 
> Is either one any different than the other? No more different than feeders and food plots.  If you don't or can't understand the difference you are not a hunter you are a shooter.



The best post in 19 pages!!!  Congrats to you Randy on spelling it out for folks.
P.S.
The baiters and snipers still wont get it.


----------



## 270 guy

rex upshaw said:


> Clip a wing and there is a good chance you will recover the bird. However, shooting a deer in the rear, or gutshooting one and there is a good chance that you will not recover the animal and you put the deer at great risk of dying a slow death.



I have drawn feathers on many a dove and watched them fly off. Your stretching it a bit much comparing a deer and a dove but we both know that.


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.  Not a competitive sport as in one hunter against another but the hunter against the animal and their perticular challenge.  For does it is merely the challenge of hitting one of those fast flying devils on the wing.  There is no challenge to hit one on a wire.  The challenge in turkey hunting is to call the bird in reversing the natural actions of that gobbler to stand there and call you to him.  The challenge of deer hunting is finding and outsmarting that old doe or buck and get a shot close enough to make a clean kill.
> 
> As I have said before, what we have in our group today are two different types of people.  Hunters and shooters.  To hunters it is all about the challenge of hunting the game and taking them on their own terms.  The shooters care nothing about the challenge of the hunt.  They are there merely to kill something.  It matters not if they kill it sitting on a wire, on the roost, with it's head in a pile of corn.
> 
> Apparently the hunters will never understand the need to just shoot something by any means just to kill it.  Likewise the shooters do not understand the challenge of hunting.  The end result is all that matters.
> 
> Is either one any different than the other? No more different than feeders and food plots.  If you don't or can't understand the difference you are not a hunter you are a shooter.



Hunting is NOT a sport it is a hobby and something we do for fun and relaxation. Last I looked we don't keep scores in hunting sports keep scores. 

The main objective in hunting  is to take the game your after otherwise it IS NOT hunting it would be animal watching and no weapon would be needed. A couple of you guys are seriously grasping at straws now.


----------



## CamoCop

some people would argue with a road map and take the wrong way home...


----------



## shdw633

Pointpuller said:


> The best post in 19 pages!!!  Congrats to you Randy on spelling it out for folks.
> P.S.
> The baiters and snipers still wont get it.



Seriously, you all keep clammering challenge this and challege that, in a world of technological marvel you still claim that what you are doing to self proclaim yourselves as "hunters" is challenging.  You go out with that longbow and homemade wooden arrows like Trent Barta does it and I will bow down to the whole challenge argument but when I see you guys all puffed up with your pics taken with the most advanced weapons and gadgetry known in the history of hunting and then bellow about challenge then I am just going to laugh, because it is obvious you don't know what challenge really means.

Just curious Pointpuller, did you take that elk in your avatar with a long bow and wooden arrows on public land or were you on a guided hunt?  I already know the answer to the first question because I can see the new high speed bow that's in the picture with composite arrows and titanium blades.  I believe those bows are capable of shooting out to 100 yards if I am not mistaken, although 60 is usually any "hunter" will go out to.  Did you use a modern elk call while dressed in the latest Scentblocker Realtree Camo.  How about your optics, did you have a laser rangefinder as well as crystal clear binos or maybe a 20X spotting scope to help you out.  Tell us the challenges you faced taking the elk in your avatar.  Believe me when I say I am not picking on you Pointpuller only showing that we are not as far apart as you and others on here would like to think we are.


----------



## shdw633

rex upshaw said:


> How can you argue that shooting at a flying dove, with a shotgun, can be compared to taking a running shot at a deer? How many pellets are coming out of a shotgun shell compared to a centerfire round? a wounded dove will often either go down, or be shot by another hunter in the field. A wounded deer can run quite a ways, with little blood and the ability to recover the animal is quite low. In other words, you have many more things stacked in your favor while shooting a flying dove, than you do at a running deer. Length of shot must also be considered. It is up to the hunter to know their limitations, be it deer hunting, dove hunting, or any other type of hunting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Code:



That is not for you or I to determine, you have no idea the shooting capability of the indivdual behind the weapon and yet you continuously choose to try and levy your beliefs and restrictions on those individuals.


----------



## rex upshaw

shdw633 said:


> That is not for you or I to determine, you have no idea the shooting capability of the indivdual behind the weapon and yet you continuously choose to try and levy your beliefs and restrictions on those individuals.



It's really pretty simple, a running shot is not viewed as a high percentage shot, just as a quartering to in bowhunting isn't. I think that people, all too often, take shots that are marginal at best. In my opinion, the animal deserves more than just a marginal shot, booner or not. I'd rather pass on a shot, than to jeopardize wounding the animal.


----------



## G Duck

Randy said:


> No I am not joking.  While I have never owned a 300 mag I have a friend who does.  He once shot a doe in the lower jaw.  She fell dead.  He shot a bucks leg off.  He fell dead.  It is the hammer of thor I tell you.
> 
> BTW, the 270 is a piece of crap!



Are you kidding?  .


----------



## Randy

270 guy said:


> Hunting is NOT a sport it is a hobby and something we do for fun and relaxation. Last I looked we don't keep scores in hunting sports keep scores.
> 
> The main objective in hunting  is to take the game your after otherwise it IS NOT hunting it would be animal watching and no weapon would be needed. A couple of you guys are seriously grasping at straws now.



As I said unless you are a hunter, you would not know the difference.


----------



## Randy

G Duck said:


> Are you kidding?  .



No I am not kidding .


----------



## TROY70

Holy cow...
Has the baiting bill made it to senate for a vote yet?


----------



## 270 guy

Randy said:


> As I said unless you are a hunter, you would not know the difference.



You just agreed with me and proved my point exactly. You must not be much of a hunter. You are digging yourself into a HUGE hole. You really should stop now before you make yourself look even worse.


----------



## G Duck

rex upshaw said:


> It's really pretty simple, a running shot is not viewed as a high percentage shot, just as a quartering to in bowhunting isn't. I think that people, all too often, take shots that are marginal at best. In my opinion, the animal deserves more than just a marginal shot, booner or not. I'd rather pass on a shot, than to jeopardize wounding the animal.



Running shot is the norm while hunting deer w dogs .  Number 1 buckshot. I have seen more deer over the years lost by a rifle and bow. Than deer shot running. I grew up hunting this way. And if you have never been on a true dog hunt , you are not qualified to say "That's not hunting"


----------



## G Duck

TROY70 said:


> Holy cow...
> Has the baiting bill made it to senate for a vote yet?



I agree !  Whatever the outcome, I wish they would hurry up.


----------



## Throwback

rex upshaw said:


> Clip a wing and there is a good chance you will recover the bird. However, shooting a deer in the rear, or gutshooting one and there is a good chance that you will not recover the animal and you put the deer at great risk of dying a slow death.



rex I've been on I don't know how many dove fields. Every time I am on one I see dovesgetting feathers knocked off and they keep flying. What do you reckon happens to that bird? Why is that viewed as any different than wounding a deer and it running off other than a deer has fur and looks like bambi when it's little? 

And just to let you know, in some states it is ILLEGAL and therefore unethical to shoot mourning doves. I believe it was in Minnessota or wisconsin several years ago they tried to legalize dove hunting. Guess what? People --anti hunters and the dreaded "non hunting voters" --came out of the WOODWORK to protect it. Talks about how horrible it was to kill a dove. How it was a bird of peace, etc etc. and how horrible it was that it was killed in other states. And you know what? I bet there were  more than a few "ethical hunters" in that state that backed keeping it illegal to hunt doves because "real ethical hunters don't shoot doves they shoot pheasants or ducks" or some other illogical statement based on nothing other than what they personally thought was right and wrong because of what they were taught by some random person and tradition. 

Case in point, look at the opening two or three paragraphs of this article  

http://dmjuice.desmoinesregister.com/article/20110321/NEWS10/103210313/1001/NEWS

my inital question was why it was "ethical" to shoot a dove on the wing when one is more likely to WOUND it than if it was sitting on a wire/tree/ground which is considered unethical and puts one in the "trash hunter/borderline poacher" category. you and others still haven't answered it--other than attacking me for asking the question which challenges your personal beliefs. 

Want to know why you haven't answered it? Because you can't. 


T

P.S. I wonder how many states that don't allow dove hunting allow baiting for deer?


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.



I reckon Im just a shooter then, because Im in it for the food and fun. If it was meant to be for sport only (bet the Natives would thought differently) then using an animal would be the most unethical thing you could do for your excitement. Why not just shoot skeet if its just for the sport

Nothing wrong with the challenge of calling a turkey or grunting a buck in, thats all fun and exciting and part of the hunt, but these animals we eat were not intended to be your sport. If your just sport hunting, you have lost your respect for the animal. Try watching a little Ted Nugent


----------



## Randy

Spotlite said:


> I reckon Im just a shooter then, because Im in it for the food and fun. If it was meant to be for sport only (bet the Natives would thought differently) then using an animal would be the most unethical thing you could do for your excitement. Why not just shoot skeet if its just for the sport
> 
> Nothing wrong with the challenge of calling a turkey or grunting a buck in, thats all fun and exciting and part of the hunt, but these animals we eat were not intended to be your sport. If your just sport hunting, you have lost your respect for the animal. Try watching a little Ted Nugent


That is a BIG difference.  The indians did indeed have to hunt for food.

As for Ted well he is a shooter.  I don't think he has ANY problems with that.  Adn that is OK if you want to be a shooter.  It is not illegal.


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> Clip a wing and there is a good chance you will recover the bird. However, shooting a deer in the rear, or gutshooting one and there is a good chance that you will not recover the animal and you put the deer at great risk of dying a slow death.



Define "good chance" and where the chance is not good.

Define "slow death" and how slow is too slow.

I have recovered both animals after looking for them. Even some  Dove were still alive and had to break their necks to finish them off. 

The point is, your not suppose to shoot at any "target" unless you have a clean killable shot. Be it running or flying. Too many times, folks that cant shoot a running deer stoop to the ole "ethics" soap box to justify why they didnt shoot instead of just admitting they couldnt make a clean kill on a running deer. Which by the way is no shame, the only shame is covering it up using ethics as reasoning and trying to force that idea on others that they are unethical for shooting a running deer.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> That is a BIG difference.  The indians did indeed have to hunt for food.
> 
> As for Ted well he is a shooter.  I don't think he has ANY problems with that.  Adn that is OK if you want to be a shooter.  It is not illegal.



No that was just being sarcastic. Im still a "hunter" by definition of its original intent.

Regardless if you and I are in a different position in life than the Natives were, that doesnt require us to hunt for food to survive..................the intent of the hunt is still the same, meat in the freezer to feed the family. Some have just lost that aspect because they have manipulated hunting to suit their thrills.

If your not just as happy with a doe on the ground as you are with a 10 point.......................I would not get in a debate declaring who are hunters and who are shooters. You have lost the passion of hunting..........


----------



## Randy

Spotlite said:


> No that was just being sarcastic. Im still a "hunter" by definition of its original intent.
> 
> Regardless if you and I are in a different position in life than the Natives were, that doesnt require us to hunt for food to survive..................the intent of the hunt is still the same, meat in the freezer to feed the family. Some have just lost that aspect because they have manipulated hunting to suit their thrills.
> 
> If your not just as happy with a doe on the ground as you are with a 10 point.......................I would not get in a debate declaring who are hunters and who are shooters. You have lost the passion of hunting..........



I admit to having lost some of my passion for hunting because hunting has changed so much.  That being said my intentions for hunting have never been meat in the freezer.  That is easy.  That can happen in my back yard.  I do not have to go hunting to do that.


----------



## UYD4L

Randy said:


> Because quite honestly these sports are not about killing.  They are not about food.  They are about the sport of hunting.  Not something we do for food necessarily though that is a nice by-product.  These are sports.  Done for the challenge.  Not a competitive sport as in one hunter against another but the hunter against the animal and their perticular challenge.  For does it is merely the challenge of hitting one of those fast flying devils on the wing.  There is no challenge to hit one on a wire.  The challenge in turkey hunting is to call the bird in reversing the natural actions of that gobbler to stand there and call you to him.  The challenge of deer hunting is finding and outsmarting that old doe or buck and get a shot close enough to make a clean kill.
> 
> As I have said before, what we have in our group today are two different types of people.  Hunters and shooters.  To hunters it is all about the challenge of hunting the game and taking them on their own terms.  The shooters care nothing about the challenge of the hunt.  They are there merely to kill something.  It matters not if they kill it sitting on a wire, on the roost, with it's head in a pile of corn.
> 
> Apparently the hunters will never understand the need to just shoot something by any means just to kill it.  Likewise the shooters do not understand the challenge of hunting.  The end result is all that matters.
> 
> Is either one any different than the other? No more different than feeders and food plots.  If you don't or can't understand the difference you are not a hunter you are a shooter.



I understand what you are saying.  And I agree that the challenge of hunting is an important aspect.  However, there are some problems with making laws based on your line of reasoning.

First, the characterization of hunting as nothing more than sport is extremely detrimental to hunting, IMO.  From my experiences I believe there is a very large percentage of the general public who does not think killing animals for fun is a reputable sport.  Even if you are back in the woods stalking with a bow, many people think ambushing and killing defenseless animals simply for the fun of the "challenge" is cruel.  And I'm not just talking about tree huggers.  I think this is why most of the general population doesn't hunt.  

Second, there is a real problem with making laws that are based on the challenge of hunting, because we have been taught contradictory ideas about what is acceptable, as T and Shadow have pointed out.  Here's a few more examples:  

Which is more challenging, (therefore, more ethical under your logic), a 9 year old killing a spike in a food plot or someone who has been hunting 30 yrs killing a mature doe in the woods?

Which would be more challenging, trying to kill a big buck over bait in GA, or paying to go hunt a big buck with JT in IL?  (Huh, Jeff?)

Which is more challenging stalking a deer or hunting from a climber?

Bow or rifle?

The list goes on and on.  The fact is many accepted practices like hunting in other states, climbers, and rifles all make hunting less challenging.  If you wanted to legislate fair chase it would take a bible sized bill and no one would be happy when it passed.  That doesn't mean hunters shouldn't have ethics.  It just means they shouldn't be written down as law.


----------



## Randy

UYD4L said:


> I understand what you are saying.  And I agree that the challenge of hunting is an important aspect.  However, there are some problems with making laws based on your line of reasoning.
> 
> First, the characterization of hunting as nothing more than sport is extremely detrimental to hunting, IMO.  From my experiences I believe there is a very large percentage of the general public who does not think killing animals for fun is a reputable sport.  Even if you are back in the woods stalking with a bow, many people think ambushing and killing defenseless animals simply for the fun of the "challenge" is cruel.  And I'm not just talking about tree huggers.  I think this is why most of the general population doesn't hunt.
> 
> Second, there is a real problem with making laws that are based on the challenge of hunting, because we have been taught contradictory ideas about what is acceptable, as T and Shadow have pointed out.  Here's a few more examples:
> 
> Which is more challenging, (therefore, more ethical under your logic), a 9 year old killing a spike in a food plot or someone who has been hunting 30 yrs killing a mature doe in the woods?
> 
> Which would be more challenging, trying to kill a big buck over bait in GA, or paying to go hunt a big buck with JT in IL?  (Huh, Jeff?)
> 
> Which is more challenging stalking a deer or hunting from a climber?
> 
> Bow or rifle?
> 
> The list goes on and on.  The fact is many accepted practices like hunting in other states, climbers, and rifles all make hunting less challenging.  If you wanted to legislate fair chase it would take a bible sized bill and no one would be happy when it passed.  That doesn't mean hunters shouldn't have ethics.  It just means they shouldn't be written down as law.


Who is talking about making any laws based on the challenge of the hunt?  The only laws (presently) being changed are to allow you to shoot a deer wiht his head stuck in a pile of corn.  Those people you talk about who may be against hunting just for the fun of it are definately against shooting animals with their heads in a feed bucket.  But who cares about that.  I don't want to make or change any laws.  I want them to remain just like they are.


----------



## UYD4L

Randy said:


> Who is talking about making any laws based on the challenge of the hunt?  The only laws (presently) being changed are to allow you to shoot a deer wiht his head stuck in a pile of corn.  Those people you talk about who may be against hunting just for the fun of it are definately against shooting animals with their heads in a feed bucket.  But who cares about that.  I don't want to make or change any laws.  I want them to remain just like they are.



They probably wouldn't, but as I've stated before thats because their perception of hunting, having heard from many like you, is that it is only a sport. 

The law that you are arguing in support of was made (according to you) based on the challenge of the hunt.  The proposed bill is not an additional law so much as it is a removal of that law which was made based on the challenge of the hunt.  The argument between making a law and keeping a law makes no difference, the underlying reasoning is the same.  

Technically, you may not be the one changing the law in this case but you should be.  Your rationale for keeping the law on the book is it is needed to protect the challenge of deer hunting, right?  So don't we need laws to outlaw commercial hunts in the midwest, the use of rifles, the killing of immature deer, etc., etc.?


----------



## rex upshaw

G Duck said:


> Running shot is the norm while hunting deer w dogs .  Number 1 buckshot. I have seen more deer over the years lost by a rifle and bow. Than deer shot running. I grew up hunting this way. And if you have never been on a true dog hunt , you are not qualified to say "That's not hunting"



I have done it several times, back in the 80's, so I guess I'm qualified.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I admit to having lost some of my passion for hunting because hunting has changed so much.  That being said my intentions for hunting have never been meat in the freezer.  That is easy.  That can happen in my back yard.  I do not have to go hunting to do that.



Randy, hunting may be changing in some ways. Some folks change with it, some dont. America has changed so much in the last few years...................but Im not, and its still going to be America to me when I go to bed tonight


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> The point is, your not suppose to shoot at any "target" unless you have a clean killable shot. Be it running or flying. Too many times, folks that cant shoot a running deer stoop to the ole "ethics" soap box to justify why they didnt shoot instead of just admitting they couldnt make a clean kill on a running deer. Which by the way is no shame, the only shame is covering it up using ethics as reasoning and trying to force that idea on others that they are unethical for shooting a running deer.



Are you really going to argue the difference between a deer standing still (not alarmed) and a deer that is running? Way too many variables with a running deer, such as jumping, zig zagging and just the fact that the deer is a fast moving target.

The problem is, you can't guarantee a clean kill on a moving deer and often times you are going to miss your mark. This is not covering up anything with ethics, just pointing out that you should be responsible when hunting. Many people take shots that they shouldn't, be it at a running deer, through brush, or at a distance they aren't qualified to shoot. 

How often do you practice shooting your rifle at a moving target, that simulates that of a deer, at various distances?


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> Are you really going to argue the difference between a deer standing still (not alarmed) and a deer that is running? Way too many variables with a running deer, such as jumping, zig zagging and just the fact that the deer is a fast moving target.



Your pushing a chain uphill I am not arguing the difference between a deer standing still and a running deer

I said shooting a running deer with a clean killable shot That means taking those variables into consideration before you shoot, right?


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> Are you really going to argue the difference between a deer standing still (not alarmed) and a deer that is running? Way too many variables with a running deer, such as jumping, zig zagging and just the fact that the deer is a fast moving target.
> 
> The problem is, you can't guarantee a clean kill on a moving deer and often times you are going to miss your mark. This is not covering up anything with ethics, just pointing out that you should be responsible when hunting. Many people take shots that they shouldn't, be it at a running deer, through brush, or at a distance they aren't qualified to shoot.
> 
> How often do you practice shooting your rifle at a moving target, that simulates that of a deer, at various distances?



See the above post. I got in there while you were modifying your post


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> See the above post. I got in there while you were modifying your post



And how often do you practice running shots?


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> Are you really going to argue the difference between a deer standing still (not alarmed) and a deer that is running? Way too many variables with a running deer, such as jumping, zig zagging and just the fact that the deer is a fast moving target.
> 
> *The problem is, you can't guarantee a clean kill on a moving deer and often times you are going to miss your mark. This is not covering up anything with ethics, just pointing out that you should be responsible when hunting*. Many people take shots that they shouldn't, be it at a running deer, through brush, or at a distance they aren't qualified to shoot.
> 
> How often do you practice shooting your rifle at a moving target, that simulates that of a deer, at various distances?



Dog hunters would argue the fact that you are way off base with that comment. And it is an ethics issue, you dont do it for "reasons" you think are right, so you think know one else should.


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> And how often do you practice running shots?



We shoot coyotes, skeet, dove, all are moving targets.....................


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> Dog hunters would argue the fact that you are way off base with that comment. And it is an ethics issue, you dont do it for "reasons" you think are right, so you think know one else should.



I will give you that the fact about shooting deer with a shotgun are better than with a rifle, but how often do you practice shots, with a rifle, at a moving target?


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> We shoot coyotes, skeet, dove, all are moving targets.....................



You shoot dove and skeet with a rifle? Shotgun patterns are a different story.


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> I will give you that the fact about shooting deer with a shotgun are better than with a rifle, but how often do you practice shots, with a rifle, at a moving target?



I never said anything about a rifle. The discussion was about a moving target. The choice of weapon is also a variable to consider when shooting anything, moving or standing still. It just points out the fact that some folks chime in and hammer down on an issue like shooting a moving target is not really an ethical shot without looking at all the variables themself


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> You shoot dove and skeet with a rifle? Shotgun patterns are a different story.



See post 953


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> I never said anything about a rifle. The discussion was about a moving target. The choice of weapon is also a variable to consider when shooting anything, moving or standing still. It just points out the fact that some folks chime in and hammer down on an issue like shooting a moving target is not really an ethical shot without looking at all the variables themself



So what is your opinion of shooting a running deer with a rifle?


----------



## Randy

Spotlite said:


> Your pushing a chain uphill



I think we all are.  As I said there are shooters and there are hunters.  Not that one is better than the other there are just different reasons for being out there.  One does not understand the other and the desires of one does/can affect the other.


----------



## Spotlite

rex upshaw said:


> So what is your opinion of shooting a running deer with a rifle?



Consider all the variables. Open field, wooded area, full blown run or just on the move, distance etc.

I have shot many in a field that were in a lazy trot


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> the desires of one does/can affect the other.



Thats sad


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> Consider all the variables. Open field, wooded area, full blown run or just on the move, distance etc.
> 
> I have shot many in a field that were in a lazy trot



Fair enough. I just think that many people who take running shots, never practice such and I feel that to be irresponsible. Same goes for not sighting in your turkey gun. You should be aware of what both you and the gun are capable of.


----------



## badfaulkner

buckbacks said:


> Go hunt somewhere else.
> Noone needs your imposed restrictions placed on them because you want to see more. Spend the money and join a club that has those guidelines and it won't be a problem.
> No need for you or anybody else to push for limits imposed on others statewide because you can't see deer when you are in the woods. Maybe some of these guys on here like Rex and Randy can teach you some woodsmanship...



Because I don't have a barrel of antlers, you assume I have no woodsmanship.  LOL. Should I assume because you hunt so often and kill so many bucks every year that you are jobless, on the government dole, and have no means of gainful employment? How does that assumption grab you? LOL.  

Buck limits are coming and will pass the General Assembly are going to put you out on the ledge, I expect.  Don't jump; it's not the end of the world.  Just the end of you trying to compensate for other shortcomings by killing every buck you see in the fall.


----------



## Randy

Spotlite said:


> Thats sad


I agree and the reason I will be forced to quit hunting if baiting becomes legal in my area.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I agree and the reason I will be forced to quit hunting if baiting becomes legal in my area.



Thats even sadder Randy. Did you quit driving when you found out folks drove 90 in a 60

Do we have any data or studies anywhere that show the baiting states info of the polls of baiters and non baiters answers to the following;

1. Have you seen a decline in deer population

2. Have your deer gone nocturnal

3. Are your deer being pulled to other properties that bait more

4. Are your deer predictable and patterned to specific feeding times

I personally dont see how it would affect me. I had neighbors for the last couple of years that fed year round and we never saw a difference in deer sightings. The corn is there now, its just over 200 yds and out of sight.


----------



## Randy

Just going by what the people in south Georgia have been saying for years.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> Just going by what the people in south Georgia have been saying for years.



So you are drawing a conclusion about your hunting future based off of what people are saying in an area that hasnt even started baiting yet


----------



## Randy

Spotlite said:


> So you are drawing a conclusion about your hunting future based off of what people are saying in an area that hasnt even started baiting yet



I have seen how baiting works in other states.  And even the talk from South Georgia is "our neighbors are baiting and we have no deer.  We want to be able to bait legally to compete.". Now maybe, just maybe the really just want to shoot deer over bait!


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I have seen how baiting works in other states.  And even the talk from South Georgia is "our neighbors are baiting and we have no deer.  We want to be able to bait legally to compete.". Now maybe, just maybe the really just want to shoot deer over bait!



I dont know, you may be right.


----------



## Spotlite

Randy said:


> I have seen how baiting works in other states.  And even the talk from South Georgia is "our neighbors are baiting and we have no deer.  We want to be able to bait legally to compete.". Now maybe, just maybe the really just want to shoot deer over bait!



Randy, I do have an article that is very ineresting to read. I cant vouch for it being valid or accurate. But it is an eye opener. Those that really want to bait should at least read it. Only for information only, even if I were going to by a lawn mower, I would want to know the pros and cons of what I was getting into.

http://wideerhunters.org/articles/baitingeffects.pdf


----------



## rex upshaw

Spotlite said:


> I dont know, you may be right.



south carolina allows baiting and they have seen a decline in numbers.  now bag limits are also an issue, but you would have to think that some of the cause of the decline is due to people being able to readily shoot deer over feed.  this article is from december 22, 2010.

Columbia, SC -- 
The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (DNR) wants to put a limit on the number of deer South Carolina hunters can kill each year. 

The population of deer in the state has dropped from about 1 million to 750,000.


http://www2.wjbf.com/news/2010/dec/22/sc-dnr-proposes-limits-deer-hunting-ar-1253754/


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

Spotlite said:


> So you are drawing a conclusion about your hunting future based off of what people are saying in an area that hasnt even started baiting yet



Really? 

According to Rep. Jason Shaw's testimony in the House Game, Fish & Parks Subcommittee hearing he has always poached over bait right up to the time he was elected this past November.

Of course he claims that he quit once elected.


----------



## General Lee

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Really?
> 
> According to Rep. Jason Shaw's testimony in the House Game, Fish & Parks Subcommittee hearing he has always poached over bait right up to the time he was elected this past November.
> 
> Of course he claims that he quit once elected.


No news there.I've hunted with every kind of elected official from school board members to sheriffs and game laws were not their top priority.Seen a sheriff drive his patrol car to the weekly poker game and sit down and play.It's a different world out here in the rural areas.............


----------



## Spotlite

Mechanicaldawg said:


> Really?
> 
> According to Rep. Jason Shaw's testimony in the House Game, Fish & Parks Subcommittee hearing he has always poached over bait right up to the time he was elected this past November.
> 
> Of course he claims that he quit once elected.



Yeah, but thats the problem with politicians. You only hear what they want you to hear.........................depending on the situation or the goal they are trying to achieve, at the moment.

But what I was getting at, basing something off of what South GA is "saying" is not real reputable right now. Some may have baited, but it has not been full blown, at least not enough to see the real affects that other baiting states are having or not having. I would talk to those in extreme South GA right on the Florida line, but just anybody in the southern zone..................... 

But in the end, I hope it doesnt make it to law


----------



## Scrub Buck

We are getting somewhere now.  Atleast, some are doing their research.  Wonder where I saw that study before? Sooner or later people will figure it out.  More than likely later.


----------



## dkennedy

When's the next vote?


----------



## Mechanicaldawg

I think it is news when an elected official, in the process of a formal hearing on legislation, announces that he is trying to pass a law that will make his prior illegal activities legal.

I do agree that it is not news to some and that is probably the saddest point we can take from this whole debate.


----------



## Scrub Buck

Mechanical Dawg,

It's not only him.  There are many on here in the same boat.


----------



## badfaulkner

rex upshaw said:


> south carolina allows baiting and they have seen a decline in numbers.  now bag limits are also an issue, but you would have to think that some of the cause of the decline is due to people being able to readily shoot deer over feed.  this article is from december 22, 2010.
> 
> Columbia, SC --
> The South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (DNR) wants to put a limit on the number of deer South Carolina hunters can kill each year.
> 
> The population of deer in the state has dropped from about 1 million to 750,000.
> 
> 
> http://www2.wjbf.com/news/2010/dec/22/sc-dnr-proposes-limits-deer-hunting-ar-1253754/



Respectfully, if you read the study our deer and turkey guru did on baiting (Charles Ruth), he found that less deer were killed in the lower state, where dogging and corning are _not _illegal.  They're either not as easy to kill over corn as perceived or more lower state hunters pass up bucks.  Either reason would explain why lower state hunters spent more time in the woods per deer killed than upstate hunters according to Ruth's study on baiting. 

Upstate hunters conclude they're better hunters.  Lower state hunters say they're more selective on bucks.  The answer or "truth" may be some of both but I would also like to add that our upstate has smaller parcels of land with more hunters on them per 100 acres and that can lead to a harvest that's unsustainable for a long time.  

I, for one, have shot my last doe for awhile.  

At any rate, using corn is not the reason the population is in decline (or as Ruth says..."at manageable levels.").  

It's a combination of a joke of an "honor system" limit in the upstate, no limit in the lower state, tagless doe days for 20 years, and the unanticipated result of coyote predation.  But hunters and no limits are the primary culprit.


----------



## GA DAWG

Yall still crying about this baiting issue?


----------



## Scrub Buck

Not crying on it.! Just five miles away from the answer of how it will effect your long term, average baiters,  and any new coming baiters. Check back in two weeks.  I'm sure we will have the answer by then.  I doubt it though.  By the way, I can't wait for next Wendesday.  Can't wait to see how many people got caught for hunting turkey over bait.  Should be a hoot.


----------



## Pointpuller

shdw633 said:


> Seriously, you all keep clammering challenge this and challege that, in a world of technological marvel you still claim that what you are doing to self proclaim yourselves as "hunters" is challenging.  You go out with that longbow and homemade wooden arrows like Trent Barta does it and I will bow down to the whole challenge argument but when I see you guys all puffed up with your pics taken with the most advanced weapons and gadgetry known in the history of hunting and then bellow about challenge then I am just going to laugh, because it is obvious you don't know what challenge really means.
> 
> Just curious Pointpuller, did you take that elk in your avatar with a long bow and wooden arrows on public land or were you on a guided hunt?  I already know the answer to the first question because I can see the new high speed bow that's in the picture with composite arrows and titanium blades.  I believe those bows are capable of shooting out to 100 yards if I am not mistaken, although 60 is usually any "hunter" will go out to.  Did you use a modern elk call while dressed in the latest Scentblocker Realtree Camo.  How about your optics, did you have a laser rangefinder as well as crystal clear binos or maybe a 20X spotting scope to help you out.  Tell us the challenges you faced taking the elk in your avatar.  Believe me when I say I am not picking on you Pointpuller only showing that we are not as far apart as you and others on here would like to think we are.



Not sure why I need to answer your questions but here goes.  I hunt with a modern compound, aluminum arrows, real feathers and 25 year old broadheads.  Public land, no guide, no pack ins.  Sleep in a cold, leaking tent pitched in National Forest land, no campground, power or water.  I shoot grouse and rabbits with the bow for meat.  Gather mushrooms to suppliment my food supply. I am fortunate to take the whole month of September off and live in the wilderness.  The hunting is not very good and I usually get 2-3 oppurtunities in 30 days of HUNTING.  The elk in my avitar was shot at 12 yards quartering away, called in with a modern mouth call.  Not sure what this has to do with the topic but since you asked I figured I should answer.  As for 
your last sentence.......I would say that this type of hunting is Worlds apart from sniping and baiting.  Im not much for arguing publicly but you are welcome to PM me.


----------



## 270 guy

badfaulkner said:


> Respectfully, if you read the study our deer and turkey guru did on baiting (Charles Ruth), he found that less deer were killed in the lower state, where dogging and corning are _not _illegal.  They're either not as easy to kill over corn as perceived or more lower state hunters pass up bucks.  Either reason would explain why lower state hunters spent more time in the woods per deer killed than upstate hunters according to Ruth's study on baiting.
> 
> Upstate hunters conclude they're better hunters.  Lower state hunters say they're more selective on bucks.  The answer or "truth" may be some of both but I would also like to add that our upstate has smaller parcels of land with more hunters on them per 100 acres and that can lead to a harvest that's unsustainable for a long time.
> 
> I, for one, have shot my last doe for awhile.
> 
> At any rate, using corn is not the reason the population is in decline (or as Ruth says..."at manageable levels.").
> 
> It's a combination of a joke of an "honor system" limit in the upstate, no limit in the lower state, tagless doe days for 20 years, and the unanticipated result of coyote predation.  But hunters and no limits are the primary culprit.



Not sure on the upper part of the state but a whole lot of folks from where I live hunt in The low country and most are in trophy managed clubs. One club I know only shoots bucks and doesn't care for the most part how big. The rest are managed for bigger bucks. maybe that's why they take less deer. Most of those clubs only allow the members to take 2 bucks at that.


----------



## shdw633

Pointpuller said:


> Not sure why I need to answer your questions but here goes.  I hunt with a modern compound, aluminum arrows, real feathers and 25 year old broadheads.  Public land, no guide, no pack ins.  Sleep in a cold, leaking tent pitched in National Forest land, no campground, power or water.  I shoot grouse and rabbits with the bow for meat.  Gather mushrooms to suppliment my food supply. I am fortunate to take the whole month of September off and live in the wilderness.  The hunting is not very good and I usually get 2-3 oppurtunities in 30 days of HUNTING.  The elk in my avitar was shot at 12 yards quartering away, called in with a modern mouth call.  Not sure what this has to do with the topic but since you asked I figured I should answer.  As for
> your last sentence.......I would say that this type of hunting is Worlds apart from sniping and baiting.  Im not much for arguing publicly but you are welcome to PM me.



No one is arguing this is debate and by your statement you are not worlds apart from sniping and baiting.  You have just set your acceptable limits of hunting conditions and expect others to either fall into those limits or be deemed less than you.  Someone like a Trent Barta could say that you are not a hunter because you choose to use a compound vs a longbow and the fact that you were able to have a whole month to do it as opposed to others only having a week or two at best or simply because you did not stalk your game instead choosing the easier method of calling them in, and because of that you are less of a hunter and more of just a killer.  Hunters that throw out corn still stay in leaky tents, backpack in, gather mushrooms and everything else you stated, but instead of using a modern call they choose to throw out some corn, no difference because each is a proven way to increase your chance of success in the killing of your game. I am not here to say your trophy was not well earned, quite the opposite, I congratulate you on a well earned trophy, but I am here to remind you that in this sport we all hunt our own ways and by our own methods which many times are dictated by schedules, jobs (or lack there of), money and home life.  Hunters need to realize that not everyone has the same luxuries that they might be able to enjoy so before you start calling people baiters and snipers you might want to think about what other people that take an even more difficult road to hunt may be thinking about your way of hunting and what they might want to call you.


----------



## kmckinnie

Pointpuller said:


> Not sure why I need to answer your questions but here goes.  I hunt with a modern compound, aluminum arrows, real feathers and 25 year old broadheads.  Public land, no guide, no pack ins.  Sleep in a cold, leaking tent pitched in National Forest land, no campground, power or water.  I shoot grouse and rabbits with the bow for meat.  Gather mushrooms to suppliment my food supply. I am fortunate to take the whole month of September off and live in the wilderness.  The hunting is not very good and I usually get 2-3 oppurtunities in 30 days of HUNTING.  The elk in my avitar was shot at 12 yards quartering away, called in with a modern mouth call.  Not sure what this has to do with the topic but since you asked I figured I should answer.  As for
> your last sentence.......I would say that this type of hunting is Worlds apart from sniping and baiting.  Im not much for arguing publicly but you are welcome to PM me.



I know how you hunt! Congrads is a understatment!
That is one fine animal! Get a tent that does not leak is my only advice


----------



## Scrub Buck

The people who spend the time are hunters.  As if, we are never inconvienced in life.  I've been divorced twice.  Because of my passions.  I understand it.  They never did.  Part-timers bait.  Hunters hunt.  My luxury is to hunt.  Not bait.  I've paid the price.  Why should I have to suffer your inadequencies?


----------



## Randy

kmckinnie said:


> I know how you hunt! Congrads is a understatment!
> That is one fine animal! Get a tent that does not leak is my only advice



I say get a hammock.  I will never sleep on the ground again!


----------



## 243Savage

Ok folks...some input regarding participation in this thread, so take it for what it's worth.

The conversation seems to be straying more from the intent of this thread, which is to have a civil dicussion about HB 277.  The focus seems to have shifted to side discussions regarding who's way of hunting with preferred equipment and methods is better and some posts have hinted at personal challenges of others ethics directed to specific individuals.  Some of y'all are kicking the coals at every opportunity for no apparent reason other than to provoke an argumentive response. Those of you who are doing so are making yourself quite obvious to the moderators as well as the forum members.  Don't turn this into an all out slugfest as so many of the bait subject threads have been. 

 As many of you may know or suspect, this thread has high visibility among the moderators, more so than it probably should be.  That being said, it's encouraged that everyone try to make this conversation constructive instead of destructive.

Carry on....


----------



## HandgunHTR

But don't carry...


----------



## HandgunHTR

it too far.


----------



## HandgunHTR

Or the thread....


----------



## HandgunHTR

will be...


----------



## HandgunHTR

locked down


----------



## HandgunHTR

Oh, look


----------



## HandgunHTR

We are getting really close to 1000


----------



## HandgunHTR

and we all know...


----------



## HandgunHTR

what happens...


----------



## HandgunHTR

when we get to 1000


----------



## HandgunHTR

if you don't know...


----------



## HandgunHTR

then check out the driveler threads...


----------



## HandgunHTR

in the Campfire Forum.


----------



## HandgunHTR

Which this thread resembles very closely.


----------



## HandgunHTR

Oh.  Look at that.


----------

