Baiting best method

First of all, to Richard Smith of Brunswick of last week’s article, you didn’t really help your article (BDN, Feb. 28-29) when you stated you “might take a pot shot at a bear if I was in the woods at the right time.” I think you just made a good case as to why there is bear baiting. I’m guessing that you, along with myself and countless other hunters, have spent many hours in the woods pursuing other game but have never, and I mean never, even seen a bear. Their cunning and intelligence is unsurpassed compared to some other game animals. And Cecil Gray says hunters should get off their duffs and hunt, that the required harvest can still be met. Well, that’s not going to work either, folks. If that was the case, we wouldn’t have had bear baiting in the first place. And Mr. Randall says they believe with all their hearts they are protecting hunting. No, I believe that if this initiative is passed, it could spell the end of something we’ve never seen the likes of before. And Mr. Gilka writes, “the entire hunt has been manufactured for 100 percent if a bear shows up.” Bingo. “If” is the key word here.

The issue should be this. Are there a staggering number of bears being harvested that says this practice should be stopped? Is there another harvesting alternative that can ensure the same results? Are there safety concerns for the people participating or others nearby? It’s none of these. Some people have put awful images in some of the public’s eyes that there are horrendous numbers of bears just sitting around at bait stations waiting to be fed like ordering at McDonald’s. And that is not the case either. True, food is left in a particular spot for the purpose of hopefully luring an animal in close. But they certainly don’t always come in. If that was the case, they’re would certainly be more than the 3,500 that are shot, out of around 25,000. And it still required three months of hunting to get that number. The principle of bear baiting is no worse then deer hunters hunting around fields, gardens, or apple trees. Or partridge hunting around apple trees, squirrel hunting around oak trees. You could even use bass fishing in weeds. But there is no one food source that a bear will visit with the frequency that these other animals will. They will forage on some of these food sources when available but their wariness in coming to these spots is, well, unbelievable. To set out on foot and pursue or hope to catch up to or think you’re going to wait around for these animals and keep their numbers to a manageable number is never going to happen.

For the 2002 season, 2,683 bears were taken over bait, 375 with the help of dogs, and with a large number of deer hunters in the woods in November, only 264 were taken by them. Right now the use of bait and dogs are the only methods keeping the bears at a safe and healthy number. And I use safe to show that if bear numbers are not kept under control like we have right now, their food source in the woods will dwindle and they will be in people’s back yards looking to replace it. For some people this is just a step for no hunting period. If that ever happened these same people would have no solutions for when animal numbers became unmanageable. Back to hunting. For the rest it’s purposely feeding bears. But, the other methods of hunting will not work. And the regularity of these animals showing up at bait spots and being taken are obviously exaggerated. It is not the scene that you see on TV of a bunch of bears at a dump. They are not being hand fed a whoopee pie and then shot in the head.

I have gone hunting once for bear over bait years ago. The stands were placed approximately 25 yards away from the bait for use with a bow and arrow. I believe I used them two or three days. Each night food was left for the bears. And each morning it was gone, but there were no bears taken. I believe a bear was taken there last year for the first time in a long time. It’s not the ugly slaughter that some are hoping to predict. Unfair, unethical, the chase are some of the words being used to discourage baiting. Even with the baiting the bears are still a hell of a lot smarter than we are. Maybe, seeing that the population of bears is at a safe number, it’s no worse than sitting on an oak ridge waiting for a buck. Nobody’s getting hurt. People shouldn’t keep trying to force their will onto others.

To our fellow Mainers, this issue is before us not because an animal has been treated inhumanely or their numbers need further protecting. There are large animal rights groups outside of Maine with a lot of money who have targeted a small number of hunters who employ a method that can easily be used to raise people’s emotions. If they should succeed, they will not be around to help anybody, or even the bears, when the population becomes too much and they’re deemed a nuisance and a menace. I urge you to talk to someone who is familiar with or who has been bear hunting, or go to the Maine Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Web site and read their data and information on bears before deciding. Let’s not be pushed around again by people who do not have what’s best for the bears or Mainers at heart.

Jamie Bassett

Jefferson

We need ‘bear’ facts

Hunters for Fair Bear Hunting (HFFBH) is a group of Maine sportsmen supporting the upcoming referendum to ban current bear hunting techniques. The men leading this group have stated they believe these methods to be unsporting and unethical. How are the opinions of these men useful to the society in making an educated decision on this issue?

The answer is, they aren’t! Mr. Richard Smith, a lifelong hunter, has never hunted bear. If given the opportunity, he might take a “pot shot” at one. In my knowledge of hunting, “pot shots” are “inexcusable” regardless of what species you are hunting. It leads to wounded animals and target misidentification. How humane and ethical is this? Mr. Cecil Gray, a Maine Guide, has stated in previous articles he has never guided or hunted bear himself. How does he know that “getting off our duffs” is a reliable method to successfully hunt bear? Mr. Bill Randall, a retired trapper, doesn’t tell us his resume on bear hunting. If he thinks “pursuit is the key,” apparently he has never chased a bear through the Maine woods before. I bet he used bait to lure animals in his trapping days. What is the difference?

I respect these men for their experiences in the Maine woods. I also respect that they have an opinion. What the public needs, however, is factual information from people with experience relating to this issue. If passed, how will our bear management be affected and what danger, if any, will this cause? What is the probable success rate of bear hunting without the use of bait, dogs, and traps? Is shooting a bear from a bait a simple and guaranteed practice similar to shooting a pig in a feeding trough? These are the types of questions we, the general public, need answers to. I plead for the local media to provide us with facts on this issue from people with experience and qualifications to provide answers to these questions.

Livelihoods of many hardworking Mainers are depending on the outcome of this referendum. I encourage every voter to base your decision on researched facts and not emotional opinions such as HFFBH has provided us.

Michael G. Michaud

Presque Isle

Note to readers: The NEWS asks that letters be kept brief and reserves the right to edit submissions for libel, taste, clarity, and to fit available space. Letters should include a signature, full name, address, and daytime phone number. Letters may be mailed to: P.O. Box 1329, Bangor, ME 04402, or e-mailed: bdnsports@bangordailynews.net