Thoughts on Baiting

[Non-Typical Solutions]

luvdemcoues, thank you for grasping exactly what I was trying to convey. I was beginning to think my words were written in vain. AZLance, no personal offense was intended. I merely picked your handle because it was easily remembered and your post on mixing salt with corn made me laugh. Audsley, your scientific approach is to be lauded and has merit. Care to look at the evolution of archery success rates for elk and mule deer as well? My point is still that if archery deer hunters get too successful, we may very well end up getting further restricted or even permitted just like archery antelope and elk hunters. Certainly our improving success rates may be attributable to a variety of technological and learned hunting technique improvements. Which would be easier to give up (if maintaining current liberal opportunity is important to you), modern bows/trail cameras/ground blinds or flinging corn?

 

Lastly my words are just that - MY WORDS. I am retired. I have no contact with any department personnel involved with this issue and do not seek to defend or to defame the department's position. I had simply hoped my perspective might be thought provoking to a few of you.

Thought provoking indeed and enjoyable to discuss and look at things from different angles. I think good discussion is healthy but can sometimes cause diseases......you know hoof and mouth!!!

 

I enjoy the discussion. I know I suffer from conspiracy theory all the time no matter what level of government.

But rightfully so, the governing bodies that are set up to represent us have failed us more than once so I get gun shy.

We got conspiracy going on right here in my own school district where I work if you can imagine that..............

[mr.smith]

I also believe that when push comes to shove with distribution of harvests – archers will lose. Why? Economics. Go to hunt Arizona 2012 on the Department’s web site and look at the historical sale of archery and general deer tags from 1990 to now. All except for a couple of years the Department sold between 20,000 and 24,000 archery deer tags with no long term trend of increasing or decreasing. Archery tag sales are essentially flat over that time period. Now look at general tags issued for the same time period. They go from 76,000 down to 36,000 in 2004 and back up to 43,000 in 2011. Don’t you think the Department would like to get back the revenue from the extra 33,000 tags issued in 1990 and not issued last year? You bet they would.

 

I'm not entirely sure but, doesn't that decrease in sales correspond with the nearly doubling in price of tags following the USO fiasco? Perhaps rather than limiting hunters but outlawing methods (driving more hunters away) they could decrease the cost of tags. Sometimes a lower price increases sales enough. I know I felt a little 'priced out' when the costs doubled.

[654321]

i believe by the fall draw of 2014 you will see a price increase in tags and lic.

[200"mulie]

Spot and stalk is the only way.....i do not like baiting and never will.

[naturegirl]

this subject feels a little like politics. my PERSONAL opinion is that I don't think "baiting" is necessary. I get plenty of good pics and i dont use any kind of attractant (tried salt once didn't end up caring for it even though a spike bull literally slept on it). my cameras are doing their job getting intel for me but when my hunts come I will be spot and stalk.

 

Yes I feel baiting increases your odds and yes more game will be taken as a result. I'd rather have the option to hunt every year without bait than go to a draw system with bait.

 

again just my 2 cents.

[THE RIFLEMAN]

In 22 and 23 at a 7% sucess rate for archery = How many deer???? Lets hear some actual harvest numbers!!!!

Using this logic just removing 2 or 3 mountain lions should make up for the excesive amount of white tails being harvesred by archery baiters!

This x game manager is full of it!

Tonto Rim also make the unlogical referance to revenue lost from loss of sales of rifle tags and how the G&F is losing $$ from its fund.... This is meaningles because all the $$ in the G&F is swept into a the general fund ... It's been this way since Napolitano mandated it ... Another conspiracy!

If this is truly about lost revenue for the G&F then I suggest that someone in the G&F stand up to the state and retain the funds the the AZGFD generates! To be spent on conservation like we voted on! Not swept into the general fund!!!!!

The way the AZGFD is looked at by the State Government is a revenue source to bail its a$$ out in other areas!

This is the true explanation of the loss of 100's of December rifle tags and the introduction of extra rifle hunts in October and November! This was done soley for revenue and not because of archery succes rates..... baiting with food or salt or whatever!

Again I say enforce the existing laws before making new uninforcible laws!

Answere this dierectly Tonto Rim! I dare YA!

[123456]

I consider myself pretty far to the right wing, but sometimes reules and regulations are needed. This is the ever changing reality of game management. As we hunters begin to get too successful, Game and fish must make changes accordingly. Those are the facts. Taking away baiting, is a lot easier than trying to put rules and restrictions on methods of take. i.e. bows that only shoot 220fps, no carbon arrows, 3 pin sights only. Baiting is not that big of a deal, I have used it, and didn't shoot anything off of my pile of bait. Funny thing is, most of you that use bait, say it doesn't make you more successful, but you continue using it. Sounds like foot in mouth disease. Why waste your money on something that doesn't increase your odds? Seems like a HUGE waste of money. Most of you ask for game and fish to call it like it is, (the reason for the ban is too much success, not CWD.) But you will not own up that baiting does in fact increase the odds. I fully expect them to go after trail cameras next. Will I be happy, that I can no longer use my cameras, NO. The thing is, it will help get rid of our lazy trend that America is falling into. Could you imagine if you would actually have to get in your truck and go scouting every weekend if you wanted to see what was in your area for weeks at a time. I am defintely not a big supporter of Game and fish's practices, however I see this as not that big of a deal. To each their own.

 

I like liberal archery deer seasons, and if we continue to harvest deer and many other animals at a higher rate each year, Things will have to change. I appreciate them looking at small measures to affect success, rather than doing the easy thing and just taking away days out of the season. Mandatory harvest reporting is the answer to many of their problems.

[DesertBull]

of coarse it increases the odds. So does a 4wd truck and 15x56 Swarovskis and laser range finders. It's hard to take them seriously when they give out 700 rifle tags for the same units they are claiming bowhunters took 30 extra deer.

[iBowAZ]

Baiting, no thanks...I'd rather hunt.

[Swivelhead]

I believe most people bait to draw game so photos can be captured via trail cam. A bait station can be placed away from known water sources where cameras are likely to be tampered with. Bait can be placed where a favorable approach and/or wind can be utilized for a blind or stand site. Baiting is effective, otherwise most of you would not defend it as necessary.

I strongly believe most non hunters and many hunters see baiting as cheating. I also believe baiting was not much of an issue till the advent of trail cams. G&F will ban baiting, timing is the only question left unanswered.

[123456]

Really "The Rifleman" ??? Resort to name calling. Have a discussion, do not insult, it makes all of us look bad.

[ctafoya]

coming soon..........no fishing with bait

[audsley]

Tonto Rim also make the unlogical referance to revenue lost from loss of sales of rifle tags and how the G&F is losing $$ from its fund.... This is meaningles because all the $$ in the G&F is swept into a the general fund ... It's been this way since Napolitano mandated it ... Another conspiracy!

If this is truly about lost revenue for the G&F then I suggest that someone in the G&F stand up to the state and retain the funds the the AZGFD generates! To be spent on conservation like we voted on! Not swept into the general fund!!!!!

The way the AZGFD is looked at by the State Government is a revenue source to bail its a$$ out in other areas!

 

 

Wow! All the G&F $ are swept into the general fund? And Naplitano mandated it? The Napolitano administration did some bad things regarding Game & Fish, but mandating sweeps wasn't one of them.

 

I think it boils down to this: When bowhunters aren't drawn for their first choices for deer, what do they do? Do they buy an OTC tag and go hunting deer in an OTC unit? Or does failure to drawin their preferred unit result in no dder tag being sold to that hunter? Same with firearms hunters. Do they go for their 4th or 5th choice (often southern Arizona), or do they stay home and spend their money on something else? I don't have the data to know, but Game & Fish does. They can analyze the substituion behavior of less successful applicants and see how it impacts hunting participation when it's all said and done. Maybe they already have. But that part of the argument about lost revenues is missing until we see the numbers for substituion.

[AZwest16]

In 22 and 23 at a 7% sucess rate for archery = How many deer???? Lets hear some actual harvest numbers!!!!

Using this logic just removing 2 or 3 mountain lions should make up for the excesive amount of white tails being harvesred by archery baiters!

This x game manager is full of it!

Tonto Rim also make the unlogical referance to revenue lost from loss of sales of rifle tags and how the G&F is losing $$ from its fund.... This is meaningles because all the $$ in the G&F is swept into a the general fund ... It's been this way since Napolitano mandated it ... Another conspiracy!

If this is truly about lost revenue for the G&F then I suggest that someone in the G&F stand up to the state and retain the funds the the AZGFD generates! To be spent on conservation like we voted on! Not swept into the general fund!!!!!

The way the AZGFD is looked at by the State Government is a revenue source to bail its a$$ out in other areas!

This is the true explanation of the loss of 100's of December rifle tags and the introduction of extra rifle huntgs in October and November! This was done soley for revenue and not because of archery succes rates..... baiting with food or salt or whatever!

Again I say enforce the existing laws before making new uninforcible laws!

Answere this dierectly Tonto Rimjob! I dare YA!

 

It takes a big man to name call on the internet! People like "The Rifleman" are reasons for Anti's to just stereo type the rest of us and our way of life. If you don't give anyone ammunition then they can't come back and shoot you later on.

 

In reference to this topic. I have just started baiting over the past year in the northern units and there is no denying the fact that I have had much more opportunities than prior trips. In just one January I passed on 10+ bucks over bait in hopes to take a deer over 100 inches. Two prior years of hunting including August and January I had two total opportunities not using bait at the same location. So there is no doubt that baiting has personally provided me more opportunities at deer.

 

With that said in certain areas such as 22 and 23 the terrain makes it nearly impossible to spot and stalk these crafty deer. I know there are other ways to hunt such as water, salt, etc... but for some people trying to maximize opportunity with maybe little to no time to hunt they should have every opportunity at any tactic. I agree with looking into something similar to how G&F manages our bear hunts. Maybe some type of quota per hunt and once that's reached then the hunt is shut down. Also mandatory reporting for all game in this state would be a step in the right direction.

 

My 2cents

[bowsniper]

Baiting, no thanks...I'd rather hunt.

 

WHAT A STUD!!!!