You all win...you're all hunters. May the world and all the animals in it, be fenced into small enough enclosures for you to enjoy the experience!

quote:

if the animal has a ear tag, is microchipped, has a birthdate on a excel spreadsheet is a give away

I have no problem with people shooting chattel. The issue is most of these chattel shoots are sold as hunts. No one is selling canned lion hunts at a live stock convention - they are sold as DSC and SCI.

I'll add:
-if it has a name, it's ranching
-if it's over a feeder or food plot, it's ranching
-if there is a fence, it's ranching, kinda the entire point of a fence
-if it has been watched on game cams since it was born and the decision has now been made that it is a "shooter", it's ranching
-if it was bought at auction and trucked in as put and take or to enhance the genetics of the captive population, no matter how long ago, it's ranching
-if someone own's the animal, it's ranching

As for shooting, my take is if you set up in one position and take shots at a distance well beyond that which the animal has any chance of sensing you, that's shooting. The hunting portion is all about selecting where that spot is.

I'll close by saying I've got zero issues with any of the above. Methods are often driven by terrain and the game (can't sheep hunt from a tree stand, can't spot and stalk in heavy eastern woods with crunchy fall leaves, some can't get around too well anymore or may not be able to afford a trip to Africa but deer on a Texas ranch hits the spot).

I shot a ranched bison inside a fence and it sure tasted just fine. I didn't look at it as hunting, but rather getting involved in where my food comes from, just as a fish caught in a net tastes just as good as one caught with a fly. There's a time and a place for each.

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:
You all win...you're all hunters. May the world and all the animals in it, be fenced into small enough enclosures for you to enjoy the experience!

No we all lose if all you got out of all this is you thinking we want all animals behind fence or in small enclosures.

And yes I think all of us on here are hunters just a few don't get we are no matter if fence was involved or not.

We all lose when hunters take fenced hunting too far...i.e. SOME captive breed lion hunts. I've said this before, but I'm not against hunting behind a fence. I'm against it when it crosses the line into absurdity, when animals are not allowed to join the herd/pride and simply become a put/take operation.

Just my 2¢...

quote:

Originally posted by larryshores:

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
To me:

The difference between hunting and shooting is that when I'm hunting I may not get a shot.

When I go dove hunting I am pretty certain I am going to get a shot. The birds are wild. Is this not hunting?

"I am pretty certain I am going to get a shot" There is a chance that you are not going to.

I live in pretty good dove country and occasionally we won't see a single flying bird.

quote:

Originally posted by Victor Watson:
This is what the difference is to me

Hunting= tracking/stalking an animal for the purpose of shooting an animal
Shooting = shooting an animal

Hunting is a means to an end (shooting an animal) and the first part of it is a personal experience, some like the hunting more, others like the shooting more. I personally like stalking and tracking an animal but after 3 hours of stalking an animal through the toughest terrain imaginable and I have that animal in my crosshairs, what happens next is no different than the effect of the guy that shoots the same animal from a truck in a 1 acre camp.

Up to the shooting part, hunting is a personal, self gratifying experience and has no direct effect on other people or animals. The consequence of hunting and shooting an animal is the same as just shooting an animal.

So who am I to judge others...

I spent 2 hours stalking 200 yards with Vic one afternoon on a 15,000 hectare high fenced area to shoot an Impala. Even though it was behind a fence and 400 yards from the truck, I considered it hunting.

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

We all lose when hunters take fenced hunting too far...i.e. SOME captive breed lion hunts. I've said this before, but I'm not against hunting behind a fence. I'm against it when it crosses the line into absurdity, when animals are not allowed to join the herd/pride and simply become a put/take operation.

Just my 2¢...

Heym, would you push to regulate put and take operations in SA regardless of species? Because that's exactly the next step beyond captive bred lion...

And I agree that neither type of operation should be confused with "hunting".

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

We all lose when hunters take fenced hunting too far...i.e. SOME captive breed lion hunts. I've said this before, but I'm not against hunting behind a fence. I'm against it when it crosses the line into absurdity, when animals are not allowed to join the herd/pride and simply become a put/take operation.

Just my 2¢...

Heym, would you push to regulate put and take operations in SA regardless of species? Because that's exactly the next step beyond captive bred lion...

I'm not the kind to "push to regulate" anything. I'm asking/hoping that they will do their own policing and keep their own houses in order. I believe Aaron Neilson advertises a SA lion hunt that is behind a fence, but it is my understand that these lions live/breed/hunt on the property year around. This is a good example of lion hunting behind a fence that I can support.

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

We all lose when hunters take fenced hunting too far...i.e. SOME captive breed lion hunts. I've said this before, but I'm not against hunting behind a fence. I'm against it when it crosses the line into absurdity, when animals are not allowed to join the herd/pride and simply become a put/take operation.

Just my 2¢...

Heym, would you push to regulate put and take operations in SA regardless of species? Because that's exactly the next step beyond captive bred lion...

If "put and take" means taking any captive-bred animal, releasing it in a relatively confined area with the intention that that specific animal is going to be "hunted" within a matter of hours or days, I have no problem with that practice being regulated . . . but then again I am opposed to "hunting" domesticated animals too.

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

quote:

Originally posted by Opus1:

quote:

Originally posted by Heym 450/400:

We all lose when hunters take fenced hunting too far...i.e. SOME captive breed lion hunts. I've said this before, but I'm not against hunting behind a fence. I'm against it when it crosses the line into absurdity, when animals are not allowed to join the herd/pride and simply become a put/take operation.

Just my 2¢...

Heym, would you push to regulate put and take operations in SA regardless of species? Because that's exactly the next step beyond captive bred lion...

I'm not the kind to "push to regulate" anything. I'm asking/hoping that they will do their own policing and keep their own houses in order. I believe Aaron Neilson advertises a SA lion hunt that is behind a fence, but it is my understand that these lions live/breed/hunt on the property year around. This is a good example of lion hunting behind a fence that I can support.

Let's all hope this is a wakeup call for SA. We as hunters also can vote by avoiding questionable operations. In the past 10 years or so, I have seen more and more hunters wanting something other than high fenced hunting both here in the States as well as in Africa. If the market dries up, operators will be forced to change their ways - just like any other industry. Evolve or die.

The problem in SA is that high fences were originally mandated by both game conservation and veterinary affairs to prevent contact between disease carrying game and domestic farm animals. It had nothing to do with hunting per se. Many likely do not realize that by 1902 much of SA was completely devoid of game ! Up to the 70's we shot many now protected animals on sight when found outside controlled areas.

In Botswana they constructed huge fences to control migration of game like buffalo and wildebeest.

So, do you shoot with a .45/70 and hunt with a .375 H&H?

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:

quote:

Originally posted by MacD37:

What others do as long as it complies with game laws is fine with me!

There's the rub Mac. What others do does impact you.

You are correct Mike, but I can't tell others what to do as long as they are breaking no rule of law, nor would I assume I should be able to.

..................................................................... let Freedom ring

Totally agree with Mac on this one. If you have a strong belief, savor it. Don't waste your time trying to convince others to your logic. They will make their own choices and come to their own decisions no matter what your point of view is and in doing so will bring you frustration. Live your convictions. Set an example. Live true to your beliefs and let that sway them... if they can be persuaded.

The difference between hunting and shooting is like the difference between making love and having sex.

And in both cases if the way you are doing it makes everybody look bad, you're doing it wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeBurke:

I also will not pretend to have the answers to all ethical issues. What amazes me is the refusal by many to even discuss it.

It is odd. It is almost as if since ethical issues are subjective and can be contentious, folks just want to pretend that they do not exist with respect to hunting (hence the whole if it is legal, it is none of my business attitude) . . . unless of course they are questioning the ethics of an agent, an outfitter, a gunmaker, a gun dealer, etc. It is actually a healthy discussion to have, that is why PHASA should be commended for taking it on versus adopting the path of least resistance and just letting everyone do their own thing.

I'm friends with a wealthy couple here in town that recently did a lion hunt in SA. They are about 40 yrs old and each weigh probably 350lbs. They couldn't hunt their way out of a wet paper bag, and probably can't walk 1/2 mile without taking a water and snicker bar break. I saw the video and still pics of their hunt, one in which they both bagged lions in 2 days, the last of which was a treed male. The pic showed the corner of the high fence about 20 yds behind the tree. They got their hero shots though, but if this is hunting I'll win the next 100M dash at the summer olympics.

Pathetic is what I call it.

We have Pro `roo shooters in Australia,from memory they shoot around 4-6 million `roos every year. Those fellas are fantastic shots too,does it make them fantastic hunters shooting from a Toyota?
100 roos a night 6-7 nights a week? No,now some of thjose fellas also double up as hunters of other game btw so its not a bag out on the roo boys.

There is a huge difference between hunting and shooting,those that say there is not have their heads buried.

Quote Saeed

"If there was not a very high chance of shooting anything, would you spend all that money and go hunting?"

End Quote

That is the normal way here in Victoria Australia when we go hunting for Sambar Stags in the wild and often after many many hours of travel and expense for those living in cities. We are not interested in those fenced off game in Watervalley or similar game ranch places that the shooters go to.

We hunt,we hunt hard,we utilise the signs,we follow the the tracks,we interpret and collate all the things going on around us that day,those signs,the weather ,the wind the whole shebang and it is indeed hunting.
We dont stick the rifle out of the truck window on a cushioned rest,we take running shots,we lean on trees,we shoot offhand,off packs,off mates shoulders..we hunt.We walk and we climb slippery steep hill faces in mountain country,through rocks,through thorn fields of black berry canes,through swamps,we pay money to do this for fuel/expenses not guides in deer ranches and often with not much chance of success at all,yet we continue to pay and hunt.

Yes there are many braggarts that shoot them in pens or illegally in the spotlights from vehicles or even walking on them with high power torches,they will never make a hunters arsehole.
Yes there is a difference,a huge difference and the hunters know it and the could be`s know it as well.

If any want to pick shit out of my post come on down and hunt with me...be prepared!

Well with all this great logic and wisdom on what hunting is and what shooting is. I hope no one on here thinks they have really hunted Africa then.

I would guess following a ph or tracker around walking land they have scouted for you. The fact they deal with the gov. for tags and such. Then you get to listen to the PH tell you take that one and set up the sticks for you to take the shot. Then they gut it skin it and feed you and Have a nice camp for you to rest after all your hard work of pulling the trigger.

What is the hunters part of hunting Africa well for the must part it is pulling the trigger and we all know after reading this thread that has nothing to do with hunting after all.

quote:

Originally posted by ALF:
The problem in SA is that high fences were originally mandated by both game conservation and veterinary affairs to prevent contact between disease carrying game and domestic farm animals. It had nothing to do with hunting per se. Many likely do not realize that by 1902 much of SA was completely devoid of game ! Up to the 70's we shot many now protected animals on sight when found outside controlled areas.

In Botswana they constructed huge fences to control migration of game like buffalo and wildebeest.

That is so true and the reason that any lion taken in RSA from anywhere except the Greater Kruger Reserve should be regarded as livestock...no different than a pen-raised pheasant.

The difference is some are shooters, and some are killers!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Todd Williams:

Yep. Go forth. Shoot. Hunt. Stalk. Kill. Whatever. Stay within the law where you are hunting. Every last one of you have personal definitions. Yours and my mileage may vary. Been brought up before but some may consider a high power rifle, a scope, or even a conventional firearm unsporting compared to a bow or a spear. I try not to let such philosophical discussion take away my enjoyment of the outdoors. It's like watching a bunch of Methodists argue over using grape juice vs wine at Communion.

There is certainly an array of feelings and descriptions when it comes to hunting and shooting.

I don't know why we differentiate between building a blind, baiting and then shooting a leopard on the bait but then wouldn't dream of sitting over a water hole in a blind and shoot every species of game that comes to drink, elephant included.

Many who 'hunt and stalk' also enjoy sitting in a blind and 'shooting' waterfowl that are lured in by almost any means available on the market including some high tech electronic stuff. Likewise we don't quail or pheasant stalk and hunt, we walk up, put a dog in and shoot what comes out. It is universally called bird shooting.

I've grown up in a country and culture of virtually unrestricted shooting of any game animal in any numbers of any sex or age at any time of year. From an early age I've shot for money, meat, heads, and just because I am outdoors and enjoy it. I've spotlighted and foot stalked, shot from platforms in trees, from boats and from vehicles and even one or two from choppers.
I have never regretted pulling the trigger once and have had a great life hunting, shooting, slaughtering whatever you wish to call it. My bucket list is Africa.

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
The difference is some are shooters, and some are killers!!!

As long as we are at it, let's also include stepping out of a helicopter to whack a tahr in NZ, as seen on SA. Not the best show Aaron. Give me your bear hunt in AK any day, but spare me that, not to mention the lack of mention of fences on the stag hunt - or was that free range?

quote:

What's The Difference Between Hunting and Shooting?

It may be similar to porn...difficult to always explain...but easy to recognize when seen.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
The difference is some are shooters, and some are killers!!!

As long as we are at it, let's also include stepping out of a helicopter to whack a tahr in NZ, as seen on SA. Not the best show Aaron. Give me your bear hunt in AK any day, but spare me that, not to mention the lack of mention of fences on the stag hunt - or was that free range?

Well I would guess he shows his HUNTS and I did say hunts as how they happen. So now we must say fenced unfenced to make a few happy. Get over it. He has a hunting show and does it all up front for all to see. I guess if you don't like it you could always no watch it.

Maybe he should go shot some pregnant elephant and he can be your hero like another everyone knows on here. Owe wait that's not on film so we will not just talk about that like it did not happen. Some who claim to be such great hunters should watch what they throw in there glass houses.

At least in Zim, most respectable outfitters administer a home pregnancy test on all elephant cows before they are shot.

quote:

Originally posted by bcap:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
The difference is some are shooters, and some are killers!!!

As long as we are at it, let's also include stepping out of a helicopter to whack a tahr in NZ, as seen on SA. Not the best show Aaron. Give me your bear hunt in AK any day, but spare me that, not to mention the lack of mention of fences on the stag hunt - or was that free range?

Well I would guess he shows his HUNTS and I did say hunts as how they happen. So now we must say fenced unfenced to make a few happy. Get over it. He has a hunting show and does it all up front for all to see. I guess if you don't like it you could always no watch it.

Maybe he should go shot some pregnant elephant and he can be your hero like another everyone knows on here. Owe wait that's not on film so we will not just talk about that like it did not happen. Some who claim to be such great hunters should watch what they throw in there glass houses.

Bcap:

I get it. You shot a domestically raised lioness and want us to respect that. Well, for many of us, it ain't gonna happen. Remember, Aaron has shot way more lions than any of us, but he didn't do it the easy the way. He certainly has my respect for that. So does Retreever: he went on two wild lion hunts and at the end of the day struck out. Better to do that IMO (obviously you don't agree) than shoot something that has no chance.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by bcap:

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:

quote:

Originally posted by Aaron Neilson:
The difference is some are shooters, and some are killers!!!

As long as we are at it, let's also include stepping out of a helicopter to whack a tahr in NZ, as seen on SA. Not the best show Aaron. Give me your bear hunt in AK any day, but spare me that, not to mention the lack of mention of fences on the stag hunt - or was that free range?

Well I would guess he shows his HUNTS and I did say hunts as how they happen. So now we must say fenced unfenced to make a few happy. Get over it. He has a hunting show and does it all up front for all to see. I guess if you don't like it you could always no watch it.

Maybe he should go shot some pregnant elephant and he can be your hero like another everyone knows on here. Owe wait that's not on film so we will not just talk about that like it did not happen. Some who claim to be such great hunters should watch what they throw in there glass houses.

Bcap:

I get it. You shot a domestically raised lioness and want us to respect that. Well, for many of us, it ain't gonna happen. Remember, Aaron has shot way more lions than any of us, but he didn't do it the easy the way. He certainly has my respect for that. So does Retreever: he went on two wild lion hunts and at the end of the day struck out. Better to do that IMO (obviously you don't agree) than shoot something that has no chance.

You have one point wrong with your post I don't give a shit if you respect that my 14 year old son shot a raised lioness. That right there is the problem with so many on here. You really think your that important that all people give a shit what you think. The only thing I care about is all hunters right to hunt what they want.

Dogs and cats? Where do you draw the line . . . or is there any line in your view?

I've lost count how many domestic dogs I have shot through the years in Africa. But admittedly domestic cats, not so much. Just don't see too many of them, but I wouldn't hesitate.

But of all the animals I've hunted and/or shot, I've never shot a lioness that was sleeping under a bush. That's just so wrong on so many levels...

quote:

Originally posted by MJines:
Dogs and cats? Where do you draw the line . . . or is there any line in your view?

Hell lets not use common sense. Lets keep making this subject harder then it is. No don't go shot your neighbors dog or cat and say you were hunting. But lets just say don't tell me a lioness that was out for over 3 month on 10,000 acres is not hunting. It may not be a hunt for you or everyone else but we hunted a lioness plan and simple. Oh I forgot we did shot her to after hunting her funny how that normally happens when you go hunting

Mike,

The problem is that we all have a line, but it is not the same, and as one of our founding fathers said, if we don't all hang together we will all hang alone.

I get what you are saying, and while I have no issue with captive shooting, as it seems a better life for the animal than what we typically do for any other ag related animal, I also agree it's not really hunting, or for that matter even shooting in all cases.

The problem is that no matter how well we police ourselves, the antis will distort what is being done and make it look bad, and will be able to emotionally manipulate people. If we fragment ourselves, we will have less ability to fight against that problem.

To me, the best way to deal with captive based hunting is to be up front about what it is.

I posted a hunt report not that long ago on a rhino hunt I did. It was behind fence. It was captive reared. The farm was pretty large and the rhino had as much chance to get away as a wild white rhino would have... but then again, I also know I was going to shoot one.

Was that a hunt?

I know what my limits on fence size and relative free chase are. I will admit that I have not seen a captive reared lion hunt that I would participate in, but then again I haven't seen many of them, and given I have shot wild lion, my desires are going to be much different than someone else.

I will also state for the record that I feel lion ranching is beneficial to the species, and that I believe that it can be done in a manner that I would be willing to participate in. I think most of us fall in that camp, even if we have issues with some individual operations way of doing things. With the way that you are approaching this, the baby will be thrown out with the bath water. Listening to some here, they feel that nothing artificially enclosed is hunting.

That is why I stated that we should delineate between captive and wild populations, and leave it at that.

You have quite a bit of hunting experience, I doubt that you can honestly state that all of your hunts were more technically difficult than some of these captive bred lion shoots were... so it really cannot be wholely based on the experience, while maybe I don't have your experience, I certainly cannot say that myself, either.

Bcap:

I know you don't care what I think, and you have to know the feeling is mutual. Mike J is right IMO: ethics are important. What if we said it was okay if you tied up a lion to a tree and shot it? The danger is clearly evident: you could shoot yourself in your excitement to claim the kind of beasts.

Seriously, where do we draw the line? These lion hunts are not the as most fenced operations, esp if the game is self sustaining.

Your whole argument is that many of us should support any kind of hunting as long as it is legal, or the vast majority of those ambivalent about hunting will end our way of life. Well, the best argument for hunting is conservation. Wild areas in Africa will never be utilized by photo safaris; sustainable hunting is the best viable option to preserve both flora and fauna. Somehow I don't see where raising lions to shot a few hours after their release helps our cause. It helps your son kill a lion, to be sure, but I am not sure how it furthers conservation. Perhaps if the bones are used and it can be proved that practice reduces lion poaching, then I would be okay with the practice.

As for your lioness, no, it wasn't a hunt - it was an exercise in shooting a lion. The outcome was guaranteed. After all, it wasn't released into the wild, it was released into a fenced enclosure. It was only a matter of time before you found it. Obviously my opinion, and many will disagree. I am okay with that.

So long as it is a matter of where to draw the line, it is appropriate to debate where the line should be drawn. Just because people have different views on where the line should be drawn does not mean there should be no line. If that were the case, the subject would be reduced to the lowest common denominator . . . frankly we can and must aspire to higher standard.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherAZWriter:
Bcap:

I know you don't care what I think, and you have to know the feeling is mutual. Mike J is right IMO: ethics are important. What if we said it was okay if you tied up a lion to a tree and shot it? The danger is clearly evident: you could shoot yourself in your excitement to claim the kind of beasts.

Seriously, where do we draw the line? These lion hunts are not the as most fenced operations, esp if the game is self sustaining.

Your whole argument is that many of us should support any kind of hunting as long as it is legal, or the vast majority of those ambivalent about hunting will end our way of life. Well, the best argument for hunting is conservation. Wild areas in Africa will never be utilized by photo safaris; sustainable hunting is the best viable option to preserve both flora and fauna. Somehow I don't see where raising lions to shot a few hours after their release helps our cause. It helps your son kill a lion, to be sure, but I am not sure how it furthers conservation. Perhaps if the bones are used and it can be proved that practice reduces lion poaching, then I would be okay with the practice.

As for your lioness, no, it wasn't a hunt - it was an exercise in shooting a lion. The outcome was guaranteed. After all, it wasn't released into the wild, it was released into a fenced enclosure. It was only a matter of time before you found it. Obviously my opinion, and many will disagree. I am okay with that.

Ok first the lioness was not released a few hours before we hunted her. Second she had a chance and almost won after she charged after the first shot and made it to about 30 yds of my son before he shot her two more times.

Know were did I say you needed to support raised lions or any form of hunting you don't like. I said don't do it if it is not for you. I have said and will keep saying it. Just don't talk shit about how other people hunt or side with the anti's. Sometimes saying nothing is better.

So all you elite hunters can go back hunt those man made waterholes and hunt the park borders because that is real hunting for sure. I know those waterholes were only made because the outfitters loves wildlife not to hold more game and make money in the area. Keep throwing the rocks boys your glass house is slowly breaking and when something you believe in comes up on the chopping block for the anti's don't look my way for help.
I forgot your already taking a beating with some of the stuff the antis are beating us with as that cecil the wild lion started the down fall. Oh thats right they stopped ele stuff to. Dam raised lions sure have hurt us over the last two years. But hey keeping hunters on two sides is working well lets stick with that plan.I think we can win with the great plan we have now if we just stop hunting the raised lions I know they will go away.

I believe we can all agree that one should never shoot a sleeping lioness under a bush - fence or no fence. That would be an excellent launching pad to aspire to higher standard.

Mike, I agree that discussion of where the line is should be done, but that seems not to be the point of this discussion, rather the two related threads seem to be "all captive reared hunting is not hunting and should be banned!"

My feelings are in evolution on this whole subject. Where I was before I hunted Africa is not where I am now. To be honest, I am actually now more tolerant of some actions than I used to be because I have seen more.

Can we all agree that captive reared hunts that are passed off as wild hunting are anathema?

Certainly I can agree that all hunts for captive-bred animals that are passed off as wild hunting are anathema. However, I do not see the recent threads as supporting the notion that the hunting of all captive-bred animals is not hunting and should be banned . . . I do think there are those that would support, myself included, the notion that "put and take" hunting should be banned. And by "put and take" hunting I would mean taking a captive-bred animal (of any species) and releasing that animal in a fenced enclosure with the intention and understanding that the specific animal being released will be hunted within a matter of hours or days. That is not hunting. Not even sure it is shooting.