Baiting of Wildlife
Position Statements
Mississippi Wildlife Federation
The Mississippi Wildlife Federation expresses great
concern over proposed legislation to amend SECTION 49‑7‑31
of the MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972 to allow the hunting of deer and/or
other wildlife species over bait.
For these purposes, we consider bait to include any food-stuff or
ingestible material, or other artificial attractant that is currently
defined and restricted by state statute, that has been deposited, scattered,
piled, delivered by a passive or active feeder or feed delivery system
so as to constitute an attractant, lure or enticement to wildlife and
to influence the movement of these animals for the purpose of harvest
by hunters.
We recognize that the issue of feeding/baiting wildlife (especially
white-tailed deer) is complex. We understand the dilemma presented
by the current ambiguity of the law, and the difficulty of enforcing
current law. We understand the pressures and frustrations that law-abiding
hunters face when neighboring landowners feed and/or bait deer. Under
current statute, feeding is not restricted in any way, and the fine
line between what constitutes a “feeding” program and what
constitutes “baiting” can be vague and depends upon subjective
interpretation in many cases (ie., distance from “feed” that
an individual may hunt, etc.) However, we believe that amending current
law to allow indiscriminate baiting that may include piling of bait,
scattering on trails or in concentrated locations without protection
from the elements, etc. would have the following harmful implications:
- Jeopardize the tradition and sport of hunting in Mississippi
We believe relaxation of restrictions that would allow hunters to harvest
game animals with the aid of bait will further widen the opinion and perspective
gaps between citizens who support and participate in the sport of hunting
and the citizens who do not hunt but also do not oppose the sport. The non-hunting,
as well as the anti-hunting publics, will view hunting with the aid of bait
as unethical and inappropriate. This will serve only to further compromise
our efforts to perpetuate and preserve our hunting tradition in the face
of increasing public sentiment against the sport. Additionally, the use of
bait by hunters may increase the incidence and severity of illegal harvest,
including bag limit violations, gender and antler size violations. Such illegal
harvest will have implications not only upon the property upon which the
action takes place, but can have a detrimental effect upon surrounding properties
that lie within the normal home range of the game animals. Such impacts could
be detrimental to the management efforts of these adjoining landowners/managers.
Moreover, the use of bait is contrary to the spirit of fair chase, and the
majority of both the hunting and non-hunting publics consider such use of
bait as unethical.
- Create biological and wildlife population problems
The increased density of game animals at, or in the vicinity of, bait sites
will increase the likelihood of wildlife disease transmission. The risk of
disease transmission directly from the bait is well documented, as target
and non-target wildlife ingest wet, moldy or fungus infected grain or other
feedstuffs. Such acceleration in the speed and efficiency of disease transmission
will affect many species, and can potentially result in epidemic situations
in wildlife populations. Additionally, there is potential increased predation
that will be facilitated by these aggregations of game animals, both through
the density increase and the increased exposure that results when prey species
are lured out of protective cover.
- Create habitat problems that pose significant threat to long-term
sustainability of the wildlife and forest resources.
Supplemental feeding and baiting has the potential to artificially increase
animal populations above natural carrying capacity of the habitat. Such artificially
high populations invariably result in habitat degradation and, long-term,
reduction in carrying capacity. Like the disease implications, the effects
of habitat degradation will have a landscape level impact, and could affect
a broad array of both plant and animal populations.
We stand firmly upon our February 6, 1993 Resolution, HS-7: “Hunting
Over Bait.” In this resolution the implications of
such action are clearly articulated, and we affirm our dedication
and support of legal and ethical hunting, fishing and trapping. Further,
we share the concerns articulated by the Wildlife Division Technical
Staff of the Mississippi Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks.
Since 1993, the Mississippi Wildlife Federation has been on record
in opposition to the legalization of hunting over or with the assistance
of bait. We reiterate that stance in our continued public opposition
to the use of bait to aid in the harvest of game animals by hunters.
The Federation cannot support passage of legislation during this session
that would relax current law on hunting over bait.
However, we do acknowledge the dilemma resulting from recent dramatic
increases in the use of feed by landowners and managers. Consequently,
we support and recommend that the legislature establish a task force
composed of the best expertise available from the agency, academic,
private and public sectors to study these issues and prepare a set
of recommendations for future legislative consideration. Such a strategy
would ensure that the legislature is best positioned to adequately
address the issue, apply the best scientific and pragmatic knowledge
and insight, and best serve the needs of the people and the wild natural
resources of the state of Mississippi. Such an endeavor could successfully
bring consensus to the various constituency groups involved in this
issue, without the risk of compromising our resources, our reputation
and our tradition of hunting in Mississippi. We stand ready to assist
in this endeavor in any way possible.
The Mississippi Wildlife Federation bases its position on this and
other natural resource issues solidly upon credible science and sound
wildlife, fisheries and natural resource management principles. We
exhort the Mississippi Legislature to make the same commitment to responsible
application of science-based principles of wildlife management and
wildlife/human interactions.
Audubon Mississippi
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is intended to state Audubon Mississippi’s position
on the passing of
any law that would permit the legal baiting of game for hunting purposes.
Audubon
Mississippi is opposed to the passing of any legislation that would
legalize the baiting of
game for hunting purposes due to the potential negative impacts of
these practices on
both target and nontarget
species. Audubon Mississippi supports the position statement
set forth by the Mississippi State Chapter of the Wildlife Society
concerning the baiting
of game for hunting purposes.
Chad Pope
Ecologist
Strawberry Plains Audubon Center
285 Plains Road
Holly Springs, MS 38635
6622521155
Mississippi Wildlife Society
The Wildlife Society Mississippi State Chapter Position Statement
On The
Baiting and Artificial/Supplemental Feeding of Game Wildlife Species
Baiting of wildlife by the public is usually done for the express purpose
of luring or attracting
wildlife for hunting. Artificial or supplemental feeding is often done
for the purpose of baiting
and other reasons, including recreational wildlifewatching.
Although
baiting/artificial feeding
of wildlife may be a wellintentioned
activity, the ultimate results of such activities have often
proven detrimental to the longterm
health of wildlife populations, the integrity of wildlife
habitat, to agricultural resources, and to property and human health
and safety. Additionally,
baiting of wildlife results in human/wildlife conflict, abnormal wildlife
density, increased
opportunity for transfer of disease, and other negative impacts to
target and nontarget
species.
Currently 30 states within the United States prohibit hunting
deer over bait. A public that
associates baiting/feeding with wildlife stewardship is unprepared
to understand and act on the
real and substantive threats to sustainable use and management of wildlife
resources.
Baiting, as used herein, is defined as “any food or food product
intentionally placed for the
purpose of luring or attracting game species to enhance the opportunity
to harvest, not including
a decoy, a scent, or a chemical attractant”. Thus, bait would
include any food or food products
including mineral supplements, salt, or other material representing
a food attractant placed in
wildlife habitat. Provision of food plots planted within accepted local/regional
agricultural
guidelines are not considered baiting or artificial feeding.
Artificial/supplemental feeding (henceforth noted as feeding) of
game species is defined as “the
provision of food that is artificially placed in wildlife habitat,
seasonally or yearround,
for the
purpose of luring or attracting game species to those locations.”
Scientific evidence demonstrates that baiting and feeding: (1) concentrates
wildlife at abnormal
densities; (2) increases direct and indirect contact among wildlife
species; (3) increases
likelihood of disease transmission; (4) maintains endemic disease
pools that are capable of
causing widespread sickness and mortality of wildlife and domestic
animals; (5) cause
significant habitat damage; and (6) increase intraand
interspecific
competition and stress
among and within wildlife populations. Paradoxically, while baiting/feeding
practices are
usually intended for the purpose of attracting or luring a specific
species of wildlife, these
practices may have significant detrimental effects to nontarget
species attracted to the bait or
feed. Common examples of disease problems associated with baiting/feeding
to both target and
nontarget
wildlife include blackhead (histomoniasis) and (avian pox) in wild
turkey, bobwhite
quail and other birds, bovine tuberculosis (BT) and chronic wasting
disease (CWD) in wild and
enclosed ungulates such as deer and elk, pseudorabies and swine brucellosis
in feral hogs, and
rabies and distemper in raccoons, fox, and coyotes. There are numerous
other diseases and
parasites that can be readily transmitted at baiting or feeding sites
through direct or indirect
contact between animals and the bait or feed. The economic costs associated
with wildlife
disease outbreaks and control can be severe. Costs of disease outbreaks
are generally recurring
and additive due to annual costs of monitoring and eradicating diseased
animals, and can cause a
significant decrease in hunting license revenue due to increased hunter/public
caution and
decreased hunter participation. Such loss of huntingrelated
revenue to rural economies can be
disastrous to the states economic stability and may decrease operating
budgets of state wildlife.
MWF Resolutions
HUNTING OVER BAIT
Adopted 1993 HS 7
WHEREAS, for the purpose of this resolution “bait” is
defined as shelled, shucked, or unshucked corn or wheat or other grain,
or artificial attractant as defined and whose use for hunting purposes
is restricted by state statute, or any other feed that has been deposited,
scattered, or piled so as to constitute an attraction or enticement
to wildlife; and
WHEREAS, baiting and hunting over bait is a highly controversial
practice; and
WHEREAS, hunting over bait is not an acceptable practice for a majority
of Mississippi hunters and a practice that could cause non-hunters
to take a negative view of hunting in general; and
WHEREAS, hunting and hunter ethics are under attack by those who
neither understand nor support sport hunting; and
WHEREAS, a recent hunter survey conducted by the Mississippi Department
of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks indicated 64.9 percent of Mississippi
hunters believe it is unethical to hunt deer with the use of bait;
and
WHEREAS, baiting and hunting over bait will not enhance the wildlife
resource, and no biological reasons currently exist to justify the
practice of baiting for any game animal species; and
WHEREAS, Mississippi’s harvest of both deer and turkeys is
among the highest in the United States annually; and
WHEREAS, baiting has been documented to lead to specific wildlife
management problems including disease and parasite transmission, increased
predation, and increased human-wildlife conflict; and
WHEREAS, Mississippi state statute and public notice defines bait
and makes it unlawful to “hunt, trap, or kill any fox, wild bird,
or wild animal with the aid of bait”;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED this 6 th day of February 1993 that the
Mississippi Wildlife Federation (MWF) reaffirms its resolution in support
of legal and ethical hunting, fishing and trapping; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the MWF goes on record as being in opposition
to the legalization of the hunting of resident (non-migratory) game
species over bait.
Comments
Frequently Made Comments
- Everyone in Mississippi is baiting and feeding game wildlife species.
Many sportsmen have retained the Fair Chase ethic and are educated
concerning the potential disease problems associated with baiting
and feeding wildlife and have chosen not to jeopardize the sport
they love.
- There is no proof that baiting or feeding causes any disease problems.
There are well over 100 references in the literature linking various
wildlife disease epidemics to baiting and artificial feeding. The
classic example is the spread of Bovine Tuberculosis in white-tailed
deer and elk in Michigan, which was directly linked to baiting and
feeding of deer and elk. Baiting causes deer to congregate more closely
than normal, increasing contact among animals and encouraging the
spread of diseases shed in feces, saliva and other excretions. Diseases
or infections that might be spread:
- Bovine tuberculosis is a contagious disease of cattle that
can be spread from animals to humans and can lead to death.
- Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is an infectious disease that
leads to death. CWD is spread by deer ingesting the infected
feces or from saliva from an infected deer. \
- Demodectic mange causes hair loss and lesions to the infected
animal.
- Parasitism is the transmission of harmful parasites of deer
including lungworms and stomach worms increases when deer are
concentrated.
- The majority of states already allow baiting and artificial feeding.
As of July 2003, 28 states (Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado,
Connecticut, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Mexico, New York,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
Wisconsin, Wyoming, and West Virginia have bans on the baiting of
game wildlife species. Twenty-six states had total bans on baiting
of game wildlife species and at least two more states, the latest
being New York in 2003 have banned baiting since 1999.
- It is more cost-effective to bait than to manage habitat.
Michigan State University estimated that the TB epidemic in Michigan
caused by baiting and feeding cost producers $156 million in lost
livestock and forage revenues, aside from the significant loss of
wildlife resources and the recreational value of hunting.
- Baiting does not cause diseases or loss of other wildlife.
A study showed that a random sample of deer corn purchased at different
vendors in Texas found that of 100 bags purchased, 40% had higher
that legal levels of levels of aflatoxin for livestock and human
consumption. Aflatoxin is produced by fungi that develops on corn,
soybeans, peanuts, and other grains. Aflatoxins are harmful or fatal
to livestock and are considered carcinogenic. In high levels aflotoxin
can kill or cause diseases in wild turkeys, quail, songbirds and
small mammals.
Turkeys are attracted to bait and predators soon take advantage of
this situation. An Alabama biologist observed six predator-killed
turkey carcasses over the course of one summer around wildlife feeders.
- Feeding corn helps deer.
Enterotoxemia is a disease of deer that is caused from them overeating
corn and other grain used to bait them. It affects the microflora
in their rumen causing diarrhea, enteritis, and often death aside
from its negative impacts on other non-target wildlife species.
- Baiting and feeding do not create problems for other wildlife species.
Mycoplasma, avian pox, blackhead, and numerous other diseases are
often transmitted in wild turkeys and other birds and animals from
corn or other bait placed for the admitted purpose of hunting deer.
Research shows that ground nests in the vicinity of bait stations
have a greater risk of discovery by predators than nests in areas
where bait stations do not occur
In addition over-browsing near bait sites results in the destruction
of habitat. As population densities increase at these baiting areas,
the pressure on the surrounding habitat increases. In many cases
baiting deer has created populations that exceed what the environment
can maintain. Deer eating at bait stations will over-browse native
vegetation in the area as well. They select the better quality plants
and cause an increase in plant species that have little or no wildlife
value. The amount and type of plant species are negatively affected
by the concentrated foraging of a baited deer population. In addition,
high concentrations of deer around bait stations alter the local
habitat which leads to changes in the composition of co-existing
bird populations; including a decrease in abundance and diversity
of songbirds.
- We have not had any disease problems in our deer herd in Mississippi.
Anthrax was detected in Leflore, Sunflower and Tallahatchie counties
in the summer of 1991. Bluetongue and other hemorrhagic diseases
do occur periodically across the state and occasionally cause serious
deer population declines.
Baiting vs. Supplemental Feeding
Chronic Wasting Disease
MDWFP Articles
For Further Reading
Deer Baiting Issues in Michigan
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division Issue Review Paper 5
February 26, 1999
A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan Project
W-127-R
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division
P. O. Box 30444
Lansing, Michigan 48909-7944
Deer and Elk Feeding Issues in Michigan
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division Briefing Paper
March 9, 1999
A contribution of Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration, Michigan Project
W-127-R
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Wildlife Division
P. O. Box 30444
Lansing, Michigan 48909-7944
A Comprehensive Review of the Ecological and Human Social Effects
of Artificial Feeding and Baiting of Wildlife
By L. Dunkley and M.R.L. Cattet
February 2003
Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre
c/o Department of Veterinary Pathology
Western College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Saskatchewan
52 Campus Drive
Saskatoon, SK S7N 5B4
United States Department of Agriculture
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Veterinary Services
National Center for Animal Health Programs
Hunt Fair Chase
Deer Management Issues – Baiting and Supplemental Feeding
Georgia Wildlife Federation - Baiting Resources
Publication available from Wildlife Management Institute:
Feeding
Wildlife – Just say NO!
Contact information for Legislators
|
