IV,

Once again, you are citing the exception rather than the rule!

First point that should be addressed is that you are applying "Western Deer thinking" into the equation.

Deer in Texas do not migrate. No furry animals in Texas migrate. Therefore, no migration routes occur. Yes, they move around a small range, but no massive migration.

To answer your questions, When I say small or large, I am simply recognizing the difference between the "shooting pen" and a piece of land that has enough terrain and cover and acreage to provide a hunt, not a shoot. The acreage could vary based on the conditions of the land as to what would constitute a large or small ranch.

When I said If your argument is that the ranchers are in it strictly for the money, buddy, I have some news for you! I was answering the charges that others have made that high fence ranches will operate without concern for the herd. Operate strictly for maximum profit with no concern for well being of the animals.

Yes, most ranches with high fences are doing it to turn some kind of a profit, but like anything, it can be done with care and compassion for the animals.

On the other hand there are a lot of ranches that are high fenced who do not allow others to hunt there. It is for personal or family use only.

Ok, now about the "stealing the publics deer" bit.

Arguments that the fenced ranch steals animals from the public is ridiculous. At the closure of the fence, there will be a certain number of animals on the ranch. This number is likely to be about the same number that live there anyway. This is the same number of animals that were unavailable to you to hunt anyway, because you can not come on private property without permission, or a fee. Hold on a minute....at the time of the closure of the fence? What about what time of year it is? The same number opf animals would likely be there anyway? What? Last I checked, animals (especially deer) do move around a bit. Also, these animals WERE available to hunt because their were no BARRIERS to their movement, granted I may not be able to access the private land, but they may ...move....on...to ....the adjoining land?.

Come on IV, You have always come across as an intelligent individual. I am sure you understand the flow of deer in a non-migratory environment there will be deer moving on and off of a piece of property all the time. The animals on a private ranch are not immediately available to you to hunt because you can not trespass. If these leave the ranch, others will enter the ranch.

All of my examples are for all practical purposes. This number of deer will always be unavailable for the public to hunt +/- a few %. So the closure of a fence does not effect the population density outside the fence. So, the number of deer available to hunt is still the same! There will always be X deer/acre +/- X%. The fene does not change this ratio. It is the same. If the fence does change it at the time of closure, it can't be by too much, and it will naturally regulate itself in a short period of time. For all practical purposes

The closure of the fence is a one time deal. If there are holes, or a water gap goes out, the flow is each way, deer come and deer leave. For all practical purposes, there is no change in the population outside the fence.

Since we are talking about care and compassion for the deer ...

If the land were unfenced, I could plant the entire thing in alfalfa and draw deer off neighboring properties and let people pay a trespass fee and shoot as many deer as I could. Yes, you could. And I would applaud you for it. If your neighbor wants to compete with you and create even better HABITAT than you have to try and influence the movement of the deer, then great. In the end, the WILD animals win by selecting the best habitat.

Why would you think it is acceptable to overhunt a piece of property? Kill off all the bucks and leave the herd in worse shape at the end of the season than at the beginning?

Come on, I know you are smarter than that!

quote:

Come on, I know you are smarter than that!

I used to think the same thing but I've since changed my mind. He appears to be overeducated (no common sense)

quote:

Originally posted by Wendell Reich:
IV,

Come on, I know you are smarter than that!

Well, as has been said many times on this forum-- we will have to agree to disagree. I am not out to make any enemies. (I do that well enough in person)

One thing we probably can agree on is DDDDDIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRKKKKKKKKKKK......(Nowitzki!) Go MAVS!

IV

I.V.

I have grown up in Texas my whole life and do not know of one migrant animal we have in the southern part. If I am wrong please educate. The ranch I hunt we manage the land in such a way as to increase the quality of life for all the animals. We do this in all sorts of ways all year long. We keep numbers below carrying capacity, control burn, manipulate brush, reintroduce native plants and grasses, put in watering areas. No money is made on the deal, it is all for private enjoyment. I think we have done a great job in greatly improving the quality of life for all the animals on the ranch. Then we kill some of them, but thats beside teh point.

Perry

So keeping a WILD animal behind a fence increases it's quality of life?

You think that fences actually HELP with disease control?

You gotta get out more....

Thank God I don't live in Texas!

MG

quote:

Thank God I don't live in Texas!

Hotdamn! We finally agree on something.

Wendell is correct high fences will not
have any effect on public hunters as only
3% of Texas is public land! It's all deeded land

Madgoat your "theory" on disease control is completely backwards, 180 from reality. And yes keeping a wild animal under a high fence does increase their quality of life, on our place it is a PROVEN FACT.

Perry

I am a dedicated South Texas deer hunter. Personally I like the feeling of the term "fair chase". It makes me feel like I am a better deer hunter.
I have only hunted on one high fence operation. It was 3000 acres of the most dence brush imaginable. I hunted with a guy that had taken a 192" buck the previous year. That deer had never been seen by anyone on the ranch. IT was aged at 7 years old by the game warden.

The best deer I saw on my four day hunt was a 160 class eight pointer we saw one time on a sendero riding in a jeep. We hunted hard for that buck the rest of the trip and never saw him again.

The only time I saw the fence was at the main gate.

Was it fair chase. I think so but it wasn't Wyoming or Montana.

It wasn't a place for Elk.

Most people just don't understand the density of the brush in South Texas.

I say let the guys out west stay there and let us Texas hunters enjoy what God gave us.

Good hunting to all of you.

And " Yes, Canned hunts should be banned"

Bullsprig

i sure wish we were out hunting.

It's just farming under another name. Maybe when I'm 90 and can't do it the way I want any longer, certainly not yet.

We sure have a lot of opinions from people who have never hunted in Texas, South Africa, or even Florida. High fences around ranches in the 6000 to 25,000 acres + are serious fences, and necessary for the landowners to maintain their investments. Go take a look at the Brady Ranch website. That's a Florida exotic game ranch with the largest herd of Axis Deer in the USA. One moment you can feast your eyes on a herd of over a thousand deer, the next moment they have disappeared entirely into the brush. Same goes for those mixed herds on Texas ranches where they have White tails, Fallow, Axis, and more all residing on the same property. You may see a huge herd around the feeders, but then that same herd disappears into the underbrush, and then you aren't going to see a deer unless you are very good, and the deer is dumb enough to miss you. On the big African ranches, hunting has surpassed cattle as the cash crop, and despite the high fences there, the game does migrate, because most of the big antelope can either clear the fence if they feel like it, or burst right thru like the femce was never there.

Is it ethical or fair to hunt inside the fence? Sure, as long as the hunt isn't for a penned animal. 10,000 acres of underbrush offers a lot of hideaways, whether fenced by normal cattle fences, hog fence, chicken wire, or high fence. Also, you need to take into account that some jurisdictions are requiring high fences along roadways to protect drivers from running into deer. If you don't think a deer can destroy a vehicle, start paying attention or check out the results of deer damage in places like the Southern Tier counties of New York or the Hill Country of Texas.

LLS

All considerations about the hunting/shooting aspect of high fence operations aside, the risks to native wildlife by these types of operations IS a HUGE concern (hybridization, habitat destruction, intraspecific competition, disease, just to name a few) to many states. If you don't think privitization of wildlife is of any concern, do a google search and find out for yourself. Texas will eventually have to pay for all the exotic and high fence madness. If you all are so brazen to think you know better than ol' Mother Nature, she'll show you her evil hand in due time.

I'm just glad WY had the foresight to outlaw these types of operations back in the day. They posed too great a risk to our wildlife, and thank goodness our wildlife professionals here realized that.

MG

Why don't we need high fences? A few examples for the sceptics...

Alberta's Fun with game farms

More Alberta

NEW YORK
New York – The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) confirmed the states first cases of CWD in two wild deer in April. The first positive result was found in a yearling white-tailed deer that was collected as part of an intensive testing program in an area near two game farms due to the confirmation of CWD on each farm only weeks before. Since that time, three more deer were confirmed CWD positive on one of the farms. Both game farms have since been depopulated and samples were taken for testing. The second wild deer, a 3-year-old white-tailed doe, was confirmed on May 4, located within a mile of the location where the initial, first result was detected.
Six game farms associated with the two infected facilities that may have sold to or received animals from the infected game farms are under quarantine and surveillance. DEC moved quickly to enact emergency regulations that curtailed the movement and handling of deer and animals parts within a containment area in Oneida County. A prohibition against the collection, sale, possession or transport of deer or elk urine taken from any animals in the area has also been enacted. Officials have also taken samples from deer in adjacent Hamilton County with results pending.
The first discovery of a game farm CWD infected animal in New York came after the animal had been butchered and consumed at a Sportsmen’s Feast sponsored by a local fire department. The fire department had received the animal as a donation for the feast from one of the two game farms. Tissue samples were collected from the animal and submitted for testing but the results were not received before the animal was served up at the barbecue. Public officials are now trying to find and contact all feast attendees who may have consumed the venison.

TENNESSEE
A 1991 ban on private ownership of white-tailed deer in Tennessee was upheld on May 3, 2005 for the third time in the state Court of Appeals in Nashville. The state allows animals to be held only by zoos, temporary exhibitors and rehabilitation facilities, not private game farms. The court ruled that the law gives the state the authority to protect native, wild animals from such threats as chronic wasting disease (CWD) which has frequently been confirmed on private game farms or where privately owned game are held captive in concentration. The challengers said the law unfairly restricts interstate commerce, the buying and selling of game or game body parts.

MONTANA
Montana biologists warned us
about game farms 10 years ago

A decade ago, Montana wildlife officials became alarmed at was then the up-and-coming trend of raising elk within fences.

They had little regulatory authority to restrict game farms, except to attach fairly minimal requirements to the required state license. And they had more dire predictions than hard science to back their foreboding.

Their fears have come true in Colorado, not Montana, but that's small comfort, given the distribution of potentially infected elk among game farmers and the apparent spread of the disease in the wild.

Back then, Montana biologists were more extensive than the same warnings now going around belatedly in Colorado. They said confining ungulate herds would almost certainly incubate and spread disease, and they also worried that escaped exotics could dilute the gene pool of wild species.

Their fears were exacerbated by the often-petulant attitudes of some of the key figures in the blossoming game farm industry, including a Darby-area operator who quickly chalked up a series of infractions.

As did David Stalling, as he writes above, I first saw captive elk on that Darby game farm, as part of dozens of stories I wrote for the region's newspaper. Montana officials cited Colorado as the example of where they didn't want Montana to go. I interviewed and quoted Valerius Geist at length.

Then, the disease of concern was tuberculosis, and Montana biologist warned that Alberta had recently exterminated thousands of elk because of an outbreak on game farms there.

The health threat to humans was publicly downplayed, both there and here, although more than one state biologist cocked an eyebrow in skepticism.

The more immediate concern was the release of introduced species, particularly red deer, the European elk, into the wild, where they could breed with Montana's wild herd in an undetermined and indeterminate genetic experiment.

And not long after the controversy began, an Oregon lab confirmed red deer genes in a Montana elk taken by a hunter, though the source and the upshot was never ascertained.

As the state Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks stepped up pressure on game farms to build double fences and try to cut down the number of inevitable escapes, game farm owners responded by finding more sympathetic supervisors.

They convinced state officials to shift oversight and licensing of game farms to the Department of Agriculture, where captive elk were deemed alternative livestock and considered another source of ranch revenue, instead of the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, where they were considered a threat to the species and the hunting industry.

ELSEWHERE...
CWD also has been found in farmed elk or deer herds in Colorado, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Montana, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Canadian provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

Tuberculosis anyone?

Ontario game farm woes

If you cannot see that these types of operations pose a SERIOUS threat to native wildlife, the greed must be blinding.

MG

Madgoat, good post and thanks for the information.

MG: I'm not familiar with "game farms", but based on your post, they must be bad. I AM familiar with high fence operations and they are not "game farms" as you describe. In the high fence operations that I am familiar with, the game populations are LOWER that they are on surrounding properties. As a result, the habitat is improved, and there are more, dove, quail, rats, snakes, song birds, and all manner of wildlife. Healthly habitat means healthy deer (read LESS disease).

I agree with you that messing with Mother Nature will bite us. Problem is, here in Texas, we have already messed with Her. Many years of unmanaged hunting has resulted in most areas being OVER populated with deer, particularly does. The result is habitat destruction. Favored plants for deer are long gone and even the less favored plants are depleted to the point that when a drought happens (which is fairly common), a serious die off will occur. This temporarily fixes the population problem, but the damage to the habitat is often irrepairable.

Now I certainly don't dispute that high fences can be misused, and create problems (such as those mentioned in your post). But what I wish you would consider is that high fences CAN be used for good as well as evil. (Kinda sounds like the anti-gun mantra of all guns are evil and should be banned, not recognizing that guns, and fences, are tools that can be used for good and evil)

Madgoat: Excellent post.

I am (unforunately) to "overeducated" to continue in the discussion. The debate (for some) shifted from the topic (high fenced GAME FARMS) to how "smart" (or not) I am.

I completely respect the opinions of our friends from the great state of Texas, but I am thankful Montana, Wyoming, Oregon, Washington and Idaho manage our game differently.

If I were a high fence entrepreneur or proponent of such from Texas I would certainly defend my livelihood and the livelihoods/interests of my neighbors just as adamently.

Signing off!

IV

Madgoat - Great examples, I'm certain their are dozens more. They should be stopped dead in their tracks. PUN.

I'm disabled and still I would not hunt one of the damn so called ranch's if you gave me a hunt..... I'm leaving in a few hours to go PD hunting on our western deserts, actually Pot Gut hunting, PD hunting doesn't open for 2 weeks, my son is taking me, bless his heart. It hard on him but hell that what kids are for isn't it? I've never ever given high fence a thought even without being able to get around, I never would. The thought makes me ill.

Just my thought.....

"Commercialization and Wildlife Management: Dancing With the Devil"

Then I read "Commercialization and Wildlife Management: Dancing With the Devil," an anthology edited by Nova Scotia scientist Alex Hawley. The most poignant prose of the book, for me, is a chapter written by Valerius Geist, professor emeritus at the University of Calgary, renowned elk and deer biologist, and longtime critic of game ranching.

He presents a clear history of North America's distinct system of wildlife management, based on ecological principles, in which wildlife is a public trust, belonging to no one, protected from commercial markets in meat, hide and other parts.

This public system benefits all wildlife, from grizzlies and pine martens to lynx and bull trout, for the benefit of all people. It's a system derived from hard-fought battles, by the likes of Theodore Roosevelt and George Bird Grinnell, in response to decimation wrought by unregulated market hunting and demands for parts of bison, elk, deer and other wildlife.

Texas was the only state that went its own way, fencing in both native wildlife and introduced exotics, creating a patchwork of artificial worlds where people pay to kill fenced, fed, genetically altered critters whose heads, when hanging in trophy rooms, resemble their wild cousins.

Now, the Texas way is spreading. The game ranching industry has exploded in the past decade, with hundreds of deer and elk farms established in Colorado, Montana, Idaho, Saskatchewan, Wisconsin and elsewhere.

Geist views it as an invasion, an all-out assault on hard-won conservation victories of the past. For nearly 30 years, he's been warning about the dangers of commercializing and privatizing wildlife.

The creation and expansion of markets for parts of elk and deer leads to increased poaching of wildlife, Geist argues, and also requires the manipulation of animals and habitat — including artificial breeding, genetic alterations and predator eradication — to produce marketable commodities such as large-antlered animals.

These animals are not bred for traits that enhance their ability to survive in the wild. When these animals escape, they can breed with wild elk and deer, disrupting natural selection and adaptation, and diminishing the ability of wild elk and deer to survive.

Escapes are frequent and inevitable; all it takes is a storm-blown tree across a fence. In Colorado, game ranchers themselves reported 231 escapes of elk and red deer between 1989 and 1992. But the warnings of Geist that have, unfortunately, proven most prophetic are those relating to disease.

"We're building bridges between livestock and wildlife," Geist says. "Many years ago I warned that game ranches would be, potentially, a very significant route of infection. I have been suspicious, and others have been suspicious. ... Our predictions are coming to the fore."

Ungulates, such as elk and deer, evolved in large expanses of wild country, moving across the landscape, competing for grasses and forbs, evading or succumbing to wolves, bears, coyotes or lions. They are not suited to feedlot conditions.

Congregating and feeding these animals, whether on game ranches or in the wild, creates ideal conditions for the propagation of disease. In places where state and federal agencies feed wild deer and elk on winter feedgrounds, as they do in parts of Idaho and on the National Elk Refuge in Wyoming, diseases such as brucellosis are common.

Ship these animals to all corners of North America, and you just might spread disease as far and wide as an Internet virus. Aside from reintroduction efforts, public agencies do not frequently capture and ship wild animals, and never from areas of known disease. But game ranchers move animals as part of daily business, and without adequate protocol.

Tuberculosis in Game Farm Animals

Canada has recently halted all importation of captive Cervidae from the United States due to the discovery of bovine tuberculosis in elk on Canadian game farms. Tracebacks have implicated
animals from Montana as a possible source of infection. Movements from the Canadian herd
have exposed at least 35 additional herds in Alberta Province. Within the United States,
investigations are underway in Florida, Montana, New York, Texas, and Wisconsin. Bovine
tuberculosis has been confirmed in Texas and Wisconsin and is pending in other states.

Deer & Elk Farms Directory
Texas:

http://www.deerfarms.com/tx.shtml

Red Deer Bucks For Sale

Options
+ Add Quicklink

+ Send To Friend

+ Reply To Ad


Contact Information

Posted by: bigbucks1930
Phone: 817-475-xxxx
Location: Cleburne Texas
User Ads: Show All Ads Posted by bigbucks1930

Ad Description
Beautiful farm raised, corn fed bucks. 3 & 4 year old Bucks - 9 & 10 pts Call for details and pricing
Total Ad Views: 84


Home | Deer & Elk For Sale | All Ads

Playing the Blame Game with Mad Deer and Game Farms

Topics: mad cow disease

The shocking news that the US epidemic of 'mad deer' disease has jumped from the West to the Midwest and into the huge white tailed deer population in Wisconsin has all players scrambling and pointing fingers. States that depend on money from big game licenses are assuring the public that chronic wasting disease (CWD) cannot infect and kill humans, although there is no proof for that claim and some evidence to the contrary. The deer and game farm industry blames state wildlife agencies, claiming the disease came from wild animals, but in fact the evidence points to the game farm industry as the culprit, spreading the disease by the virtually unregulated trafficking in farmed deer and elk. And, the Colorado Division of Wildlife is calling on all states to test game farms for the disease, much too late into a disastrous epidemic.

Another point I would like to make is that carrying capacities can differ for certain species based on what they eat. For example, the ranch I worked on last summer was over 7,000 acres. It was high fenced into 3 sections: 1,800 acres, 3,550 acres, and 1,767 acres respectively. The "Lower Ranch" (1,800 acres) was the most improved section. The animal populations were as follows (numbers are approximate):

150 Whitetail
300 Axis Deer
150 Blackbuck Antelope
100 Fallow Deer
125 Elk
100 Manchurian Sika
200 Aoudad Sheep
30 American Bison
6 Kudu
2 Waterbuck
2 Llamas
2 Donkeys
20 Scimitar Horned Oryx
100 Barasingha Deer
100 Pere David Deer
75 Mixed Sheep
10 Capybara
50 Rhea
15 Emu

This is approximately 1.25 acres per animal. Now before all you people who hate high fences get upset because there's too many animals, let me explain something. The owner of this ranch plants 350 acres of food plots on the "Lower Ranch" every year. Also, the Medina River runs through the "Lower Ranch" and therefore the grazing is superior for the Hill Country. Some animals like the Whitetail and Sika are mainly browsers while stuff like the Blackbuck and Bison are grazers. Then things like Axis are both browsers and grazers. Then you also have the large birds (Rhea & Emu) that eat insects and the Capybaras eat both grass and aquatic plants. It sounds like there are too many animals on this place, but the entire time I was there I never saw one animal that was sick or one animal that was unhealthy. Everything was in great shape. Now, I'll be honest, most of these animals aren't very challenging to hunt, but it's not because of the high fence, it's just because that's how the species is. I would say the Sika and Aoudad were by far the most difficult to hunt. I lived on the "Lower Ranch" 24/7 for 2 months and I only saw Aoudad on three occasions and I only saw 2-3 Sika bucks the entire summer. Then, stuff like Pere David Deer I saw everyday and you could easily walk up to within 50 yards of them at any time. The owner leases the entire 7,000+ acres to a company for $100,000 per year. He doesn't even break even once he pays for the labor and food plots. He's not it in for money (he already has plenty from something else), he just loves his animals. I just thought some of you might find this interesting. I'm sure I'll get a bunch of criticism from the "haters" soon enough.

DON'T MISS!
The Superior Genetics
Whitetail Deer Auction

August 24, 2006
Westin La Cantera Resort of San Antonio
San Antonio, Texas

http://www.texasdeerassociation.com/auction.asp

Wildlife Disease in the Open Range Environment

This work as published in the Texas Wildlife Management Handbook is often cited as the guide used by Texas deer farmers and ranchers. It paints an unhealthy picture of problems with disease in Texas ranched/farmed deer/wildlife.

http://wildlife.tamu.edu/publications/TAEXWildlife/WILDPUBS/A084.PDF

Am I the only guy on the planet who sees a distinct difference between "game farms" which use a high fence to contain a population higher than the carrying capacity of the pasture (usually in a comparitively small area, coupled with feeding, breeding etc) and RANCHES that are high fenced, where the fence generally is used to keep the deer population LOWER than what is typical in the area?

I get the feeling that many guys here think high fence equals game-farm, equals excessive population, equal disease, etc. Tain't true in my experience...

Another point I would like to address is the fact that "carrying capacity" can be GREATLY increased by improving the native habitat and planting plenty of good food plots. Dr. James Kroll did a study and concluded that a properly planted Whitetail food plot can easily support 5 mature Whitetail Deer per 1 planted acre. Therefore, if 20% of your property is planted in these types of food plots, you could (technically) carry 1 Whitetail Deer per acre. Just something to think about.

quote:

Originally posted by olarmy:
Am I the only guy on the planet who sees a distinct difference between "game farms" which use a high fence to contain a population higher than the carrying capacity of the pasture (usually in a comparitively small area, coupled with feeding, breeding etc) and RANCHES that are high fenced, where the fence generally is used to keep the deer population LOWER than what is typical in the area?

I get the feeling that many guys here think high fence equals game-farm, equals excessive population, equal disease, etc. Tain't true in my experience...

According to the data collected and published, there is little difference when it comes to disease. Even the Texas published Wildlife Management Handbook indicates problems with disease with all wild ungulates when supplementing feed in open range conditions. One may be the lesser of two evils but both are shown to be problematic over the long term.

What makes it difficult for me is that we actually have a good wildlife management model (Roosevelt et al) to go by. It has been proven successful by the test of time, is backed by the data and is universally accepted by game biologists in every state (including Texas) to be the best model to use. On the other hand; where you find problems in this country such as out of balanced wildlife populations and/or disease, you can traced it back to wildlife management policies that went astray due to politics. This includes such policies/laws that eliminate hunting and/or policies/laws that facilitate the eradication of natural predators and/or the privatization of wildlife management for commercial goals.

I'm having difficulty finding justification for any form of privatizing ownership and/or domestication of wild ungulates regardless of the height of fence.

G

Gary: if the published data you are referring to are in the chapter of the Handbook you referenced in your earlier post, then the data all refer to conditions where the wildlife populatons are held at an artificially high level:

"as animal populatons become higher, the chance of disease outbreaks becomes better"

"populatons densities are now maintained at a higher level thant the natural forage could ordinarily allow...with higher denisites, disease...can become a limiting factor..."

"In this senario (higher population densites than "normal") three major disease problems have emerged"

The first mentioned problem is anthrax (this is to an isolated area of a number of SW Texas counties and results when anthrax spores in the ground germinate under certain climatic conditions, I have been told by state wildlife biologists that no other area of Texas has this problem, although the problem may be exacerbated by high population densities). I am involved with two separate properties which are one county away from the affected area and the local state game biologists have assured me that as long as I am not in the affected counties, I need not be concerned.

The other diseases mentioned are associated with feeding supplemental feeds to raise the population densites above the carrying capacity.

Soooo...I will say again...there is a BIG difference between "game farms" where game populations are above normal, and ranches with high fences, where populations are maintained at optimal levels for local condtions....

Seems to me the people that are really enraged about some large high fenced ranches where people hunt are angry because they own land next door and dont practice any management. They got great results just shooting the deer that crossed the fence. Now they cant. They cant sneak on either its harder than crossing the barbed wire. Hell I would love to high fence my place. Keep those bastards out of my freaking stand. Tired of finding cigars and crap on my property. Never catch the hunter just find shell cases gut piles and such. Oh did I forget to mention missing game trail cameras, stands, feeders ect.

Keep the hell of my property and we wont be required to fence.

Thats the number one reason people high fence, they do quaility deer management and thier neighbors dont and shoot everything that moves with no cost.

From the SAFETY archive reference Texas Anthrax:

http://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0408b&L=safety&D=1&P=11355

TEXNAT - Extension publication,
“What and when should I feed the deerâ€? “Nothing - everâ€

http://sanangelo.tamu.edu/newsreleases/20030901b.pdf

Good balanced article that covers all sides of the issue and is specific to Texas:

"The Peril and Profit in Bagging Big Antlers Behind High Fences"

http://www.organicconsumers.org/madcow/profit5602.cfm

Suggestions for Developing Wildlife Recreational Enterprises
Gene T. Miller
Technical Guidance Biologist
Texas Parks & Wildlife Department

A very good guide. If you notice, they suggest:

- “Recreation is the reason†- the entire experience is more important than the end
product.

- understand the characteristics of
wildlife occurring on your property, the natural carrying capacity of species for sustained harvest, ....

The Texas experts and their references support the "sustained harvest/natural carrying capacity" model, not the "MSY/food supplement-extreme predator control=artificially increased carrying capacity" model that appears so popular and controversial.

http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/pwdpubs/media/pwd_lf_w7000_1149.pdf

What is the Roosevelt, et al wildlife management model?

Swiftshot -- I agree with you, know one should trespass on you land, ever. However isn't that a law enforcement problem? I believe that the animals (WILD) belong to the people of the State of Texas, maybe I'm wrong. In Utah the game animals are managed by the State period. Know one has any claim on any animal. You can improve your property all you want. I think thats great, but again You don't own any animal on that property. Call the Sheriff.......

I know we dont own the animals that run around on our property. The problem is you put the time and effort into trying to build up a few decent bucks and the idiot next door to you brings 100 people a year on to his 5 acres and shoots everything in sight. Then when the deer stop going on to his place he jumps the fence to yours. When you catch them they get pissed off and your shit gets destroyed one night. So where we are at I dont see building a fence as a problem. To me it aint to keep the deer in its to keep assholes out. To lazy to climb a fence or cut it. Goes to someone elses property. I had to fence off 20 acres of some assholes to keep him out.

M16 I would like to know how you can come off saying the western states do not want non residents hunting in their state. When you live in probably one of the most Discriminatory non res hunting states in the union. Can I come down there and hunt thousands of acres of public land? I bet not. Yeah I can get a tag but I would have to pay out of my ass to hunt on some lease. Just to clear things up its not western states its southern states that discriminate non res hunting. TX, AZ, NM,. You can buy tags over the counter in Colorado in most areas and Idaho in most areas. You can buy tags over the counter is Washington and Wyoming and Montana have good draw odds so tell me exactly which WESTERN state does not want you to hunt there? I hunted Elk last year in WY on public land. I called and talked with a game warden and the biologist for the area I was hunting. Both of them were more then happy to help me find a good area to hunt with in the unit. I also ran into the same game warden when I was there and he put me on a herd that he had spotted that day. Things did not work out on the stalk as I ran out of day light but for a person or state agency that did not want me hunting in there state they were very accommodating.