quote:

The one thing I object to is the trophy aspect. I'm not saying that all high-fenced ranches are like this, because I know they're not but on a lot of them a hunter can be almost guaranteed of a certain size rack and it has nothing to do with his hunting skill, just how much he's willing to pay, and the skill of the rancher who nurtured the deer, culled the inferior bucks, let the exceptional bucks breed, etc.. If the hunter wants to buy a similar rack for his 8 year-old son or his wife who's never hunted, the ranch can make that happen too. I've been on some ranches where they videtape the bucks and show the tapes to the hunters to build excitement before the hunt. And each hunter gets a "guide" not so much to help him get his trophy, but to make sure he shoots the right deer--a 5 1/2 year-old in his prime, rather than a 4 year-old that will be worth more next year.

And I know of a bunch of "low fenced" ranches doing the same thing. So the fence doesn't have anything to do with the situation. I guess you're either for trophy game management or against it. I have also hunted on "trophy" ranches for mule deer in Utah that operate the same way.

quote:

So the fence doesn't have anything to do with the situation. I guess you're either for trophy game management or against it.

I would have to disagreee, the fence does have something to do with it--the main reason to install a high fence is to keep "managed" deer in and inferior deer out--in other words, control the genetics. Now I'm not saying that a high fenced ranch hunt is necessarily a canned hunt or an unethical hunt, because as some have already pointed out, if the ranch is big enough then the animals are essentially free-ranging and the hunter could hunt all season and never even see the fence. So I would agree that a high fence by itself doesn't make a hunt a canned hunt or unethical.

The ethics of the hunt have more to do with how the hunt is conducted than whether there's a high fence or not. So you're right, it's not just the fence, it's the whole concept of "trophy deer management" we're talking about.

A high fence is just one part of "trophy deer management." Deer management covers a wide spectrum all the way from state game regulations on antler point restrictions, to the policies of a hunt club where they don't shoot young bucks (but the deer are free to come and go) to a high-fenced ranch where the rancher fences 500 acres, pays top dollar to a game farm for a huge buck that's used for breeding his does, feeds corn, protein, and mineral supplements that promote antler growth, and carefully controls which deer are taken and when. And knows which feeder each "shooter buck" is likely to show up at and directs his clients to the selected stand, where the guide instructs the client on which deer he can take.

At some point the skill of the hunter becomes less of a determining factor in whether he/she takes a deer and whether it's a "trophy" or not, and the skill of the rancher in animal husbandry takes over. That and the size of the hunter's wallet.

The high fence is only one part of that equation but it's an important part because without it, the whole thing doesn't work--no rancher is going to go to all that trouble and expense if "his" deer are free to walk off and get shot by someone not paying to do it.

So are high fences in and of themselves "unethical?" I don't think so. But they are an essential element in the type of hunt described above which is not something I'm personally interested in. When my friends invite me to hunt on their ranches, I go not as a paying client, but as a guest who they allow to kill a doe or "management buck" that needs to be taken according to the state biologist. I enjoy the trip, and I appreciate the venison. And learning about how they manage their deer is interesting. But for me anyway, it's more like harvesting a resource than what I like to do during hunting season.

I understand that not all high-fenced ranch hunts are like that, but there are enough that are to give these hunts a bad name.

Phil: I appreciate your considered, thoughtful, and non-emotional posts.

I'm sure that all on this board would love the opportunity to live in an area where there are a bazzilion acres of unspoiled, natural habitat to hunt. For some of us less fortunate, a high fence is a tool, used to recreate the "natural" state as closely as possible. It can be used to keep the game population DOWN to a level where the habitat is improved and all the wildlife have more nutrition. The result is a place to hunt where conditions are closer to natural than in surrounding properties.

Yes, it is also a tool that can be used for less noble purposes...

But it is a tool none the less. Much like a firearm, not evil or good....depends on how it is used.

I get a little weary of those self righteous folks who look down their noses at others without any knowledge of the local situation:

"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow mindedness" Mark Twain

quote:

no rancher is going to go to all that trouble and expense if "his" deer are free to walk off and get shot by someone not paying to do it.

Really? I know of a lot of ranchers that do exactly that. Myself included. Of course it helps to get to know your neighbors so that everyone has the same or similar ideas.

The majority of the deer in Texas simply do not range over a very large area. If the ranch is of a decent size most of the deer simply will not leave the property if it is well managed. As long as they have what they need there is no reason to leave. Granted some deer along the exterior will move between low fenced places.

The difficulty in the hunt lies in the amount of hunting pressure. Low hunting pressure means less spooky and easier to hunt deer. Fence or not doesn't matter near as much as hunting pressure.

quote:

At some point the skill of the hunter becomes less of a determining factor in whether he/she takes a deer and whether it's a "trophy" or not, and the skill of the rancher in animal husbandry takes over. That and the size of the hunter's wallet.

That could be said for any guided hunt. Whether for free range whitetail, muledeer, elk, etc. I have been on ranches out west that were not high fenced but it really wasn't that hard to shoot a good deer due to the private land and low hunting pressure.

quote:

Phil: I appreciate your considered, thoughtful, and non-emotional posts.

So do I.

I've hunted both and find the process harder inside a fenced ranch, primarily because of hunting pressure. The deer normally live to be 5-6 before they are hunted and learn plenty in those early years. The several times I've hunted public land the deer were so dumb (almost as dumb as a lot of the "hunters" I ran into), I felt guilty finally shooting one. And most of what was harvested and logged in at the park office was shamefull; everything from button bucks to 1-1/2 and 2 year old deer. I appreciate someone foregoing trophy hunting as a goal but for goodness sake, take a doe if you want meat or an even an old tired buck. Let the young ones live a little before snuffing them.

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Pennsylvania (the "free range state"), they recently had to adopt antler restrictions to keep the locals from slaughtering the fawn and yearling crop, no?

As to the hope that we are all in this hunting thing together, obviously not when posters say they would like to see high fences made illegal. Sounds a lot like you want to tell me how to hunt, regardless of what I might prefer. And if they are all "our" deer, why do people who consider themselves Americans suddenly treat out-of-staters like illegal aliens stealing game instead of jobs? Funny how that sense of brotherhood shrinks when greed kicks in.

I called it bigotry a while back on the Canadian forum and don't mind calling it what it is once again.

quote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Pennsylvania (the "free range state"), they recently had to adopt antler restrictions to keep the locals from slaughtering the fawn and yearling crop, no?

There is a tug-of-war going on between special interest groups. One faction wants to see lots of deer--the meat hunters. Another wants to see trophy racks like on the covers of Texas Trophyhunters Magazine. The latter got Gary Alt tossed out as head man in the game commision cause they said he was mis-managing the herd. Now, in the western part of the state 4 points on 1 antler is minimum to harvest. In the central and eastern parts, 3 points is minimum.

And farmers, like me, are inviting hunters to thin the overpopulated herds in and around suburbia with extra seasons and bag limits. An avid hunter friend of mine harvested over 40 whitetails last year using every means legally available--rifle, shotgun, bow, and muzzleloader here in PA and also in NJ.

I wonder if Saeed or Don has an icon with a guy banging his head against a wall. That would be appropriate right about now.

Guys, it's not black and white.

10 acres under fence does not equal 100,000 acres under fence. There are varying degrees of "difficulty of chase" within enclosures. Those who fail to recognize the difference are not going to grasp this concept, or be able to constructively discuss the issue.

Extreme views on either side are not contributing to a healthy discussion. But, then again, who said we want a healthy discussion?

Hammer on ...

quote:

Originally posted by onefunzr2:

quote:

Correct me if I'm wrong but in Pennsylvania (the "free range state"), they recently had to adopt antler restrictions to keep the locals from slaughtering the fawn and yearling crop, no?

There is a tug-of-war going on between special interest groups. One faction wants to see lots of deer--the meat hunters. Another wants to see trophy racks like on the covers of Texas Trophyhunters Magazine. The latter got Gary Alt tossed out as head man in the game commision cause they said he was mis-managing the herd. Now, in the western part of the state 4 points on 1 antler is minimum to harvest. In the central and eastern parts, 3 points is minimum.

And farmers, like me, are inviting hunters to thin the overpopulated herds in and around suburbia with extra seasons and bag limits. An avid hunter friend of mine harvested over 40 whitetails last year using every means legally available--rifle, shotgun, bow, and muzzleloader here in PA and also in NJ.

I was also thinking (and you just confirmed) that farmers had avenues to kill deer predating their crops outside of deer season, but that is as it should be.

Why would meat hunters think 3 or 4 on one side cuts into their kill numbers? There might be a year or two while the population matures but the breeding does will still produce every year regardless of the age of the bucks with which they breed. You just have a VERY short adjustment period while you shift to slightly older bucks.

Seems to me the meat hunters are asking for a canned hunt on a state-wide basis. Are they afraid older deer are too hard to kill?

quote:

quote:
no rancher is going to go to all that trouble and expense if "his" deer are free to walk off and get shot by someone not paying to do it.


Really? I know of a lot of ranchers that do exactly that. Myself included. Of course it helps to get to know your neighbors so that everyone has the same or similar ideas.

M16, I should have been more specific. I know some folks like you with ranches in S. Texas who do not do it for the money. They've installed high fences too, and they manage the herd less intensely than what I was talking about. The only people who hunt their ranch are family and friends, so you're right as far as the high fence itself goes.

Folks like you are not what I was talking about, I was talking about "the whole nine yards" or the extreme end of the spectrum where a rancher spends a lot of money on buying a stud buck, artificial insemination, different types of feed and food plots, hiring guides to control the hunt, etc., and just making the point that the only thing that makes that whole scenario worthwhile is the fence.

I am not bashing high-fence hunting itself, and I'm not bashing "the whole nine yards" either, because it has its place. If I bash it because it's not how I like to hunt, I'm just projecting my own ethics onto someone else's style of hunting. I'm sensitive to that because I grew up in an area where running deer with dogs is a time-honored tradition, and I get sick of hearing people who've never done that talk about how screwed up it is.

But, when people say things to like high fences aren't intended to control the genetics of the deer herd, or public land deer are dumber and easier to hunt than ranch deer, I've got to disagree. Deer on public land are not easier to hunt, dumber, or whatever. I've hunted public land all my life, and I've hunted high-fenced and low fenced ranches in Texas. On the ranches I've hunted in S. Texas, it never took me more than one afternoon to see a shootable deer, and it was never a question of whether we would get a shot or not, just a question of whether we wanted to kill one that day or hold out for something bigger. On public land in my experience it's much less of a sure thing. First off, you have "all those millons of acres of pristine wilderness" to choose from so you've got to get out and find 'em. And even when you do that, it ain't easy to close the deal. Yeah, I've hunted public lands where I got lucky and got a shot the first day of the hunt without trying hard, but those days are the exception, not the rule.

So based on my experience which is limited but just as valid a sample as anyone else's, I could say that ranch deer are dumber and easier to hunt than public land deer. But I'm not going to say that because it ain't necessarily so, and I have no doubt that there are many ranch deer (or their descendants) walking around right now because I wasn't smart enough to kill 'em.

Public land deer, elk, and other big game are no pushovers. To say they are is just picking a side in this argument.

quote:

Public land deer, elk, and other big game are no pushovers. To say they are is just picking a side in this argument.

Not trying to argue as the situation is quite different in Texas than other places. Around here some of the parks become overpopulated with deer so they will have a drawing for a hunt. These deer are probably the ones Tiggertate was refering to. You could probably kill them with a hammer. Some of the wildlife management areas are different. But draw a tag in one of the parks and it won't be much of a hunt. Most places have to trap and remove excess deer because of politics but here we do it with a bullet. So yes at least in our state some of the public deer are pretty tame compared to ranch deer.

quote:

Originally posted by COphil:
But, when people say things to like high fences aren't intended to control the genetics of the deer herd, or public land deer are dumber and easier to hunt than ranch deer, I've got to disagree.

I agree with you. But I would add that when people throw out broad generalizations like:

.. "shooting deer behind a high fences is always (pick a finsh)easy...unsporting...immoral...like fish in a barrel...not really hunting...etc..."

I am reminded of an old quote:

"No generalization is worth a damn, including this one"...Ogden Nash

Ok I think I understand now.

1. if I shoot deer from an elivated stand
2. if the deer are now or have ever grown bigger or stronger from man made intervention (water, crops , feed, cover , open space unatural breeding selection).
3. If I put a fence taler than 6 feet around any part of the property.

4. If any one on this board hunts in a way different from me.

Then I am not a hunter but a killer?

I am somehow less man than others here?

Should I be arested flogged keelhauled what?

Keep teaching your kids there is only one way to do things.I refuse to believe it.

when I hunt the back swamps of L.A. we hunt with dogs

when I hunt out west we spot and stalk or climb and call or whatever is localy acceptable

when in africa I walk till I cant anymore then run some and fire offhand at animals with 3 white guys 6 black guys and a game scout standing behind me .

I shot bears from boats goats from trucks pigs from helos and everything else from every means of conveyance.

I hunt on foot, from stands, from holes in the ground and in the tops of trees.

To date I have used my bear hands, sticks, rocks, bows, crossbows, knives, spears, pistols, rifles, machineguns,silencers, explosives, poison, traps,clubs, features of terane and many other means against all commers.

I have and do enjoy new ways to do things and I just love a problem I can solve with my toys.

so I have hunted everything I could any way I could for more than 20 years and have been perfectly happy with it.

all of it leagal and by local rules and customs.


I always found it better to hunt than to bitch about percieved injustices to my personal code from the couch.



It never occured to me to put other peoples hunting style up to a litmus test against my own.



on my land in TEXAS I hunt and play this game my way
This is a game that it pays to cheat at you hunt men and animals the same way! men and animals are the same to me. if I hunt them I get closer if I can. I get more stable if I can. I will at all cost conceal myself and when I shoot the shit out of them they never know I was on the same planet they just die.

As was taught me in sniper school there are many ways to get things done. perfect is the enemy of good. and most of all always cheat and always win.

I measure winning not by body count anymore but by my own enjoyment of the hunt and companionship of good friends.

if this sounds good to you lets go hunting if not f. u. im from TEXAS.

CRUSHER, I am with you on that. Some of these guys have there heads stuck so far up there own asses they can't see anything different. As long as it is legal it is good in my book.

well said CRUSHER

Crusher,

How dare you bring such objective thinking into this irrational argument!

Don't you know that facts and objectivity do not mesh well with this blissful uneducated ignorance?

You are obviously an open minded, rational thinking person. We will have none of that kind of talk here!

Amen to that Crusher,

Praise the Lord,and pass the ammunition.

GWB

quote:

Originally posted by M16:

quote:

Public land deer, elk, and other big game are no pushovers. To say they are is just picking a side in this argument.

Not trying to argue as the situation is quite different in Texas than other places. Around here some of the parks become overpopulated with deer so they will have a drawing for a hunt. These deer are probably the ones Tiggertate was refering to. You could probably kill them with a hammer. Some of the wildlife management areas are different. But draw a tag in one of the parks and it won't be much of a hunt. Most places have to trap and remove excess deer because of politics but here we do it with a bullet. So yes at least in our state some of the public deer are pretty tame compared to ranch deer.

Having visited a fair number of our state parks and hunted one (Enchanted Rock, Jan 2004) I can fully support this statement.

Crusher, If you're ever in Corpus Christi I owe you a beer. Well said!

There is more to the issue than pure property rights, which appears to be the basis of the "barnyard canned-hunt" guys. I suppose if a guy wants to drive to a farm and shoot his own beef there is nothing wrong with that. But is that the same as wild species?

We no longer live in a subsistence environment. Some species are protected so that all people can enjoy them for all purposes. Purposes include ordinary tourism, cameras and killing them on hunts. It is an emotional issue. If wild species are going to be protected, penning them up to be shot makes enforcement more difficult and raises political pressure from those who object to hunting. I think "barnyard canned-hunts" are a no-win practice. If you really insist on killing your own but can't get out to a real hunt, kill a cow. There is too much potential for emotional baggage that will discredit hunting in killing wild game in a corral. Hunting = > killing.

High fence hunting seems more reasonable but it has the potential to turn hunting once again into the sport of kings. No money, no hunt. I guess it depends on how you think about that potential. The more you take hunting out of reach of the average joe, the less sympathy you'll get on "no hunting anywhere" day at the polls. Its happened before when Prez. Roosevelt banned all deer hunting on federal lands. I don't object to large tract hunting per se, but what costs are attached and what risks are involved for hunting as a public sport? If scooting all the guys with power and money into private preserves is going to mean they thumb their noses at the average hunter and if the average hunter has the political power to stop it, why should we appprove? Our form of government means keeping everybody on a level playing field even if guys with more money get to buy tickets closer to the field.

Hunting is more than just killing. If we don't keep it that way we might lose the right to hunt. We should define hunting more carefully because it ain't what it was. Like it or not it isn't free range any more, its all politics. It wasn't when we grew up, but it is now. Recent history proves how potent anti-hunting interest groups can be. They are killing hunts all over the place. The hunting community should put as much energy into hunting as the NRA does into firearms. Be careful.

Just for the record, Roosevelt banned deer hunting not long after market hunting had stripped the country of deer, almost to the point that the herd wasn't viable. Most states prohibited it for a long period as well.

While Texas may be known as the high-fence state, we also have the following public lands which are almost all hunted to one degree or another. Some are draw and some simply require registering, and the Army bases that allow hunting have a very nominal guide fee so you don't wander off into a live fire range and step on a live 155 round or the like.

TX Parks and Wildlife: 1,483,000 ac.
Nat'l Parks Service: 1,223,000 ac.
US Fish & Wildlife: 643,000 ac.
US Forestry Service: 637,000 ac. forest
US Forestry Service: 118,000 ac. grasslnd

Ft. Hood has several hundered thousand acres open to civilians for deer hunting as well. I do not know the actual count.

In addition to the above, there are miriad hunting clubs with modest membership fees and still places where a nice front-porch conversaton and a favor or two around the farm can get a guy permission to hunt private land. Most of the people who moan about no place to hunt here in Texas simply haven't made the effort.