The Accurate Reloading Forums
High Fence Hunting Poll

This topic can be found at:
https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3411043/m/98910971

18 April 2003, 03:16
Mickey1
High Fence Hunting Poll
This is a scientific survey so don't vote more than twice and no pontification please.

There is alot of controversy over hunting behind wire in NORTH AMERICA. You can vote for or against, no qualifications on size or terrain.

"I support hunting or shooting of Game Animals within enclosures".

YES or NO

You are limited to one succinct sentence in support of your vote.
18 April 2003, 03:36
Gatehouse
NO

And good luck on getting just one succinct sentence onthis topic.... [Wink]
18 April 2003, 04:02
Chuck Nelson
NO!

Chuck
18 April 2003, 05:30
JLHeard
No.
18 April 2003, 05:34
stubblejumper
NO! I consider killing animals inside of a fence slaughtering them not hunting.
18 April 2003, 05:36
Yap Dog
No

Two words; fair chase.
18 April 2003, 06:42
Mark G
No.

I personally don't support it in N. America, but Money = Power, and we are going to lose this battle. Hunting WILL be a sport for the Rich in the next 50-100 years, here in the US. It's all about the almighty Dollar. To me my hunting heritage IS NOT FOR SALE! [Mad]
I am one of the most Law abiding hunters I know, but I am scared to think that when I am in my 60's, I may be sniping a fence to go poach one of the King's deer. Sad. [Frown]
(I'd quit hunting before I would stoop to that, but you get my point!)

[ 04-17-2003, 21:43: Message edited by: Mark G ]
18 April 2003, 07:28
<Rogue 6>
Yes, shooting an animal on someones ranch for money should be legal.

No, it is not hunting! It is shooting.
18 April 2003, 07:34
<Doc in Texas>
NO.

Doc in Texas
18 April 2003, 07:47
MtElkHunter
NO! The day I have to hunt inside a high fence is the day I give up hunting!
18 April 2003, 07:57
kk
Bullshit.

It is not a scientific survey. You cannot get a random sample off an Internet web site. You cannot control who answers at all, let alone who answers more than once.

I think it's a great discussion topic, or it would be except you stand up like you have authority and tell people they can only have one sentence worth of support.

Sorry to sound irritated, but I am.

kk
18 April 2003, 09:41
<Sika>
Unbunch your panties kk, it's just a poll.

Yes

It's not hunting, though, just the killing of farm animals. If that get's you off, go for it.
18 April 2003, 09:45
JohnTheGreek
quote:
Originally posted by kk:
Bullshit. It is not a scientific survey.
Really? [Roll Eyes] [Big Grin]

JohnTheGreek
18 April 2003, 10:38
Bakes
NO

Bakes
18 April 2003, 10:39
RogerK
NO.

What happened to Fair Chase?
18 April 2003, 10:59
Greenhorn
No. That stuff is for fat-boy, turd-tapping dingleberries.
18 April 2003, 11:13
OldFart
NO to calling it hunting.
Yes to calling it shooting.
18 April 2003, 12:24
Bob in TX
[Roll Eyes] [Roll Eyes] [Roll Eyes]
18 April 2003, 12:33
Bucktail
No
I won't personnally spend my money on it, but I don't have a problem with anyone else doing it.
18 April 2003, 12:50
Canuck
Depends.

I hate canned hunting as much as anyone, but I will not condemn the fellow that hunts whitetails on 10,000 acres of fenced brush country.
18 April 2003, 13:55
<GlennB>
Yes, If it is a large, privately owned farm or ranch. No if it is penned.
18 April 2003, 15:23
Wstrnhuntr
quote:
Originally posted by Mark G:
No.

I personally don't support it in N. America, but Money = Power, and we are going to lose this battle. Hunting WILL be a sport for the Rich in the next 50-100 years, here in the US. It's all about the almighty Dollar. To me my hunting heritage IS NOT FOR SALE! [Mad]
I am one of the most Law abiding hunters I know, but I am scared to think that when I am in my 60's, I may be sniping a fence to go poach one of the King's deer. Sad. [Frown]
(I'd quit hunting before I would stoop to that, but you get my point!)
Well said Mark! I do hope that your wrong about hunting becoming a sport for the rich only, but the indications are certianly there. The scraps that are left over for the general public after all the "pay for trophy" hunting is done are becoming less and less all of the time, but I am still hopefull that one day that bullshit will be exposed for what it really is (stealing the General Publics forest and wildlife for gain) and that wiser minds will prevail like my signature suggests. [Wink]

to keep to the subject, YES! If a canned hunt gives someone a thrill then fine, even worthless yuppie dweebs should be entitled to some sort of a hunt. Hopefully they will shoot themselves in the process. [Big Grin] As long as the animals killed are NOT PUBLIC WILDLIFE and the program is not funded by the taxpayers dollars then go ahead.. Just keep it the F*@K out of the gun rags and off of my TV because I would rather watch little house on the prarie than that shit... [Wink] Oh! was it just supposed to be one line? [Big Grin] [Embarrassed] [Big Grin]
18 April 2003, 15:33
boilerroom
Yes to exotics(they should be kept within a high fence anyway).

No to native game(not realy wild then). Some ranches are big enough to keep it fair chase but I won't be spending my money there. I live in one hell of a hunters paradise. [Big Grin]
18 April 2003, 15:53
bill smith
yawn, yawn......this kinda topic belongs on the politics page
18 April 2003, 16:14
browningguy
Yes.

A fat-boy, turd-tapping dingleberry (I think I got that right),who has two freezers filled with Axis, Blackbuck and Elk.
aka
18 April 2003, 16:28
beemanbeme
no but the size of the enclosure has got to count for something.
19 April 2003, 01:11
Razz
Nope
19 April 2003, 01:41
recoiljunky
Yes
Not everyone can spend their whole life scouting for deer, some folks have to get out and work for a living.
19 April 2003, 01:52
Tim50
NO!!!! For all the reasons already listed!
19 April 2003, 02:46
john17
id hardly call it hunting
19 April 2003, 03:00
DigitalDan
No.
19 April 2003, 06:51
Gatehouse
quote:
Originally posted by Greenhorn:
No. That stuff is for fat-boy, turd-tapping dingleberries.
Could you define that??

It seems like a really fun insult, but I'd like to know what it is before I use it.. [Big Grin]
19 April 2003, 08:25
bxroads
Yes
As long as unwelcome deer dogs can legally run through my property and under my stand [Mad] All the handler has to do is make a good faith effort to stop them. Right!!

Roads
19 April 2003, 08:44
larrys
Yes.
As long as the area is big enough. Don't care for pen shooting.
19 April 2003, 11:10
NoCAL
Yes.

Drive 10 miles east. Drive 10 miles south. Drive 10 miles west. Drive 10 miles north. Inside that 100 square miles find a whitetail buck. Not fair chase? Please. How many deer roam over more than 100 sq miles in their life? Size must be taken into account or you can't have a serious conversation about the topic.

PS I've never done it but I might under the right conditions.
19 April 2003, 13:03
kudu56
YES! If lots of acres and habitat!
19 April 2003, 13:30
Cold Bore
Not for me, thanks. I enjoy the *hunt* too much. Coming home empty-handed isn't the end of the world.

quote:
Originally posted by Mickey1:
"I support hunting or shooting of Game Animals within enclosures".
I see it as shooting , not hunting .
19 April 2003, 13:41
Eltigre
Not only yes but "HELL YES" So long as there is enough territory. I don't have to try and prove my manhood by traipsing all over the country and going home smelling like a man and thumping my chest and screaming "I am a hunter" uggg ugg ooh ooh! Now spread your legs woman! [Mad]
19 April 2003, 23:09
sakofan
Wait a minute...I think our "scientific" survey, has gotten a little confusing.
Do you mean, as previous stated "high fence" hunts, aka, the animal cant leave the vicinity, or the range of the hunter???
Or 1000's of acres of private hunting land, that allows the game to leave the private land, at their leisure??
I hunt the latter. And see nothing wrong with that...period.
This allows me to get off work, board an aircraft, and fly to my hunting area, and compete with all that nature has to offer, but NOT compete with 100's of other hunters, scaring game, loose dogs, etc.
Iam self employed, I get very little free time to hunt, fish, or even see my family unit, for Pete's sake.
These types of private ranch hunts, give me the best opportunity to harvest a trophy class animal.
High fenced hunting, on limited land, or "guaranteed kills", is not MY idea of hunting, mind you...but, that's their rodeo.
I dont have time to scout for my own game, God knows I wish I could.
You see, my idea of a long weekend, is Sat. and Sun. off from work.
"guaranteed hunts", not fair chase, NO...
Private land, w/ the animal able to leave said private land.....you bet....sakofan...
20 April 2003, 01:49
RSY
So if high-fence hunting is unethical, regardless of the parcel's size, then that makes fishing on lakes unethical, as well. Where can the poor fishies go to escape???

It's ridiculous! Just like you don't always come home with a stringer full of fish from a lake every time, so you don't always bag an animal on a fenced parcel.

As alluded to above, it's not the fence that makes it unethical, but any "guarantee." The two don't always go hand-in-hand. Anytime that word is used in reference to a "hunt," then there's an ethical problem, no doubt.

On a related note, the increasing recurrence of Texas- and SW USA-bashing, however subtle, is getting old around here. We don't need to be dealing with this self-righteous crap from each other.

It may surprise some folks, but there are not a lot of public land hunting opportunities down here. So, unlike some of our more ethically enlightened Northern brethren, we have a little more invested in our hunts than the cost of a box of shells (amortized over 15 years) and half a tank of gas for the trip to the National Forest.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

RSY