I kill several deer, bear, pigs, per year but I spend much more money in the pursuit of that meat than it is worth for my family. Id guess that is true of 99 percent of hunters in north america

I put out corn , hunt acorns , food plots , fields  and whatever is legal.

I've always wanted to hunt bear. I'd live to have a bear rug but I can't bring myself to hunt over bait. It just doesn't set well with me. I hunted with a rifle once spot and stalk in Montana. I had a great time. I guess it's the only way I'd be able to pursue one. I guess for me it's more of the hunt than the kill.

Have hunted hogs over feeders.

Feeders are the way of hunting unless legislation ever changes them in Arkansas. My family and I own private land in Arkansas and I understand the ethical dilema all to well. I would love to hunt w/o feeders but with everyone around us using them if you don't feed yourself you soon don't have many deer. My best advice is that they are sometimes a necessary evil and that we can still be ethical hunters using feeders or not depending on how we use them and how we hunt over them.

Reading all the replies to this thread has brought me to the realization how opinionated we can become concerning issues we feel passionate about. I am certain there are occasions I have been just as guilty.
I basically see it boils down to three primary thoughts, feelings, beliefs.

1.   Any form of bating is taboo, wrong, and sinful, "unethical" and should never be engaged in.
2.   Bating is ok for one species but again wrong, sinful, and "unethical" for another.
3.   Bating where legal is a choice/right.

Let's consider the first view. If we take the "purist" view or opinion that any form of bating is taking unfair advantage of the quarry in order to increase ones chances of scoring a successful kill, then we need to think about whether or not we take unfair advantage with camo clothing, attractants, tree stands, pop up blinds, game calls, rattling antlers, modern bows, deer drives, etc. etc. I would think if you are considered "unethical" using one advantage you would be "unethical" using any advantage.

Moving on to number two. Bating bears and feral hogs is generally acceptable and not considered "unethical", well, with the exception of the "purist".  Hunting food plots or any other food source, including watering holes where critters are known to congregate I suppose should be "unethical" as well. And going on those expensive African Safaris that set up blinds at feeding stations and watering holes, that is really "unethical".

Finally, some states do not allow bating and some do. If you bate in states that do not allow bating then you are violating the law. If you bate in states where it is against the law then my feeling is your integrity is flawed. In Texas bating has been lawful and even encouraged for over 50 years. Though there is some public land, by and large most of Texas is privately owned. In order to hunt in Texas you either have to know someone who has land and will allow you to hunt or you will have to pay a trespass fee to get on a hunting lease. Hunting in Texas is big business and hunting leases average between $1500 - $3500 depending on how good the lease is. Besides the trespass fee some leases will require a trophy feel also if you want to take what they consider a trophy. The leases are generally seasonal so you pay again every time hunting season rolls around. Most hunters would like to get a return on their investment so hunting feeders is encouraged.

My observation has been, those who have an abundance of public land with National Forest or heavy hardwood forests where bating has generally always been illegal, if not completely, at least in some degree hold closer to the "purist" view. Those where bating is legal and have little if any public land to hunt generally don't have a problem with it.

What troubles me are the ones who without an understanding of the other's situation get on their high horse and condemn. I think some of us can't get out of our own way.  With regards to traditional bow hunting, determining parameters as to what each of us allow within legal limits is a personal choice.

Straightshot, yours was the only post I read in this thread, and I could not agree more! I have not posted in this thread up till now because I knew how it would go.

Bisch

Louis,

Very enlightening and well written post.  I would say I agree to yours the most.  Thank you for your reply.  

IF people in TX didn't feed, the game wouldn't survive.  Its basically a target rich desert.

X 2 what Bisch said. These kind of posts are a complete waste of time and energy imo.

I'm not going to spend the amount of money it takes to keep one going.

Here in CA, it's illegal.  But I'd question the ethics of high-power spotting scopes to spot deer on distant ridges long before I'd question the ethics of bait.  But to each their own.  At least here, one is legal but questionable, in my opinion, while the other one is forbidden.

Last time for me. I would never judge anyone other than myself. I said earlier we have no referee in our sport. Like golf I want to break 80. I never have. But to truly break 80 in my mind I have to putt every putt. No gimme's. That's how I feel about my hunting. I don't need the meat but if I did I take the game by any means. I'm just wired weird. I think I'm still 6 volt.

I use feed with cam to see whats happening,but prefer to hunt natural feeding places.

This is an interesting thread. I have an observation regarding ethics. That topic is very subjective, so we will never really have a consensus on what is or is not ethically acceptable. What one considers ethical may not be ethical to another, and that is okay as long as it is legal. No, I am not saying "legal" automatically translates into "ethical", but it does give a dividing line on what a court might deem allowable.

I personally don't care for baiting, except in the case of hogs. They are an invasive species that does tremendous damage to habitat and to the livlihood of other animals. Even though they are fun to hunt, my belief is they should be very heavily curtailed as an ecological matter, barbecued pork not withstanding.

Living and hunting in Deep East Texas is a challenge all to itself.  Thick stands of Pine and Hardwood timber with the thickest briars and yaupon you could imagine.  I own my property and have access to the Angelina National Forest adjacent to my Southern Boundary.  Unfortunately, we do not have definitive deer trails and the oak trees abound, so there is no particular area where you could ambush a deer, other than locating a pinch point.  The above, coupled with the most jittery deer I have ever encountered will cause one to use any legal method to close the gap on your success.

Do I have feeders on my property; yes.  Do I hunt them; yes.  Have I been successful; yes. That being said, I have changed my strategy in recent years to include finding a strategic point located within sight of my feeder but not within shot distance.  I throw out a little hand corn to stop the deer if they come my way but I have had little success thus far.

My belief is that if it is legal and you do not have reservations about hunting a feeder, then do so.  However, if you do not believe it is ethical or reasonable, then don't.  By all means though, respect other opinions than just yours.

Lots of woods, especially big woods, are like that...not much in the way of definitive trails.

Not legal here in NY. But that doesn't stop the feed stores from selling feeders, corn, blocks, tasty treats of all kinds. Somebody's using them--not me.

Absolutely not.   I do not see any sportsman ship in that  style of hunting and could never be proud of a kill.

http://library.nd.gov/statedocs/GameFish2/Baitfeedcommitteefinalreport140520100323.pdf

So many misconceptions.  It was far easier for me to kill deer on public land in the Northeast (PA/NJ). Without feeders than it would be on my private land in Oklahoma hunting over feeders.  I would love to see them made illegal, then I would still do what I do now.  Plant food plots and hope to find a hot oak tree, lol.