Hunting over bait is not cruel but it is unsportsmanlike, for certain, where we were raised in Southern Illinois and Missouri you would be teased mercilessly if it became known you hunted over bait and you’d probably get a visit from the warden, but that was deer hunting as bear had not yet repopulated the hills. On the other hand, in Alaska life can be harsh and hunting is often much more than just a sport and a lot of people subsist on it. When it comes to survival there is nothing wrong with being unsportsmanlike so long as there is no risk of exterminating a species.
Hunting caribou [and moose] from boats isn’t new.... indigenous people have done it for ages. The motor’s new, but the principle is the same.
It’s really not entirely the federal government’s business, even on Federal land within states- there should be some local control over local resources regardless of who owns the land, certainly if states have a say over private individuals who own land within their borders, why should the Federal government landowner be exempted when their population of ‘nuisance animals’ cross borders onto local property to prey on livestock or desirable wildlife on adjacent land?
I understand both sides of the debate about hunting over bait. In some places it’s the only effective way to hunt. For example there are places in Texas where the animals have miles of thick mesquite to hide in. You can’t go in after them, they would hear you crunching through the bush well before you ever saw them. If you want a chance to shoot one you have to lure them out. Yet I see hunters who denounce feeders but see nothing wrong with setting a tree stand over a field of crops. Also some hunters are disabled to one degree or another. I used to hunt, but now I have bad joints and can’t walk more than a couple hundred yards at a time due to the pain. I could never do a spot and stalk hunt. If I did hunt now it would pretty much have to be some “unsportsmanlike” method.