An argument for the German model of hunting

Fine Figure of a Man said:

I think that was entropy's point as well.
I, for one, oppose government mandated hunter safety classes as it is.
The idea that someone is a safer hunter after having gone to a 4-6 hour class is ridiculous.
The $25-$30 fee is the primary reason for the class requirement.

Click to expand...

So I agree, I oppose required hunter safety classes, seat-belt law, helmet laws etc but at the same time, and this is very cynical and sad to say, people in general are pretty dumb and need all the help they can get. So the libertarian in me says not to require a hunter safety course but my experience hunting public land has me saying a required college level course on hunting might not be a bad idea for some of these yahoos. Reality and principals don't always go well together...

mcb said:

my experience hunting public land has me saying a required college level course on hunting might not be a bad idea for some of these yahoos.

Click to expand...

I've met plenty of college educated yahoos that would undoubtedly pass such a course while learning nothing from it.

daniel craig said:

Farmers and landowner partner with hunters because they have quotas to meet. On year a farmer could be mandated to kill 60 deer that year and if he can’t do it himself has to invite hunters to hunt the land so that the quota can be filled.

Usually people get together as hunting parties and make a weekend out of it and there’s often a warden there (all the deer have to be inspected after kill too).

Almost no land is allowed to go unhunted too.

Click to expand...

Extremely stupid and socialistic idea. Incredibly asinine.

entropy said:

Fortunately, it's not a yearly or expensive thing

Click to expand...

I wasn't equivocating Hunter Safety to what's required in Germany. I was expressing thanks that it is not. All that information is available to those who want it here, often by State DNR's, for little or no charge, and of course by Sporting Good dealers (Cabela's runs seminars all the time, well up until Covid-19) and in books, etc. And I am a big believer in learning it all. But it shouldn't be mandatory, for the reasons mentioned, and I reiterate below.

jmorris said:

It’s also not required by all. At least not in my State. I guess they figured younger people would be more accepting of their rights being restricted. That’s why, when it started, it only required kids to take it. If you were born on or after Sept 2, 1971, you had to take it. If your older than that you don’t have to have permission from the bureaucracy.

Click to expand...

Not if you are older than that, no. Same in MN, where I took Hunter Safety. I was not required by the State to take it when I did in 1976, (I was 12) My Dad insisted I take it, as I did with my two boys. But classes on the level required by Germany, while definitely worthwhile, should not be mandatory. It is equivalent to requiring CCW holders to Graduate all the non- Instructor-level Pistol classes at Gunsite. It becomes a socioeconomic barrier effectively keeping the 'masses' from hunting, as Chuck R. mentions in post #67.

German hunters use dogs to get the game up and running toward the shooters posted downwind. It is a hunting style that works quite well for them. But I doubt if many USA states would condone this as well.

TR

IMO: We don't need anything like the "German model of hunting".

T.R. said:

German hunters use dogs to get the game up and running toward the shooters posted downwind. It is a hunting style that works quite well for them. But I doubt if many USA states would condone this as well.

TR

Click to expand...

Done in the South all the time

I think it is great, for Germany. If that is what the Germans want.

For myself and Indiana, I don't give a flying doughnut about the Germans or how they do ANYTHING. I live in Indiana and I like it fine. I LITERALLY MOVED here BECAUSE I LIKE IT. I don't want one single thing changed to be like ANY WHERE OR ANY ONE else. People who like something some where else SHOULD MOVE THERE!

H&Hhunter said:

Hunting is complicated, expensive and an activity of the connected and wealthy. It’s more about making business connections and doing deals than it is about the joy of hunting.

Click to expand...

Sadly, in many areas of the U.S., this is the direction hunting is going. Limited access to private land, means folks either have to cough up big bucks to buy their own land, pay lease fees or hunt private ranches/clubs. Means paying big bucks regardless. Business connections and impressing clients is big on private ranches and clubs. Many big businesses have corporate ranches or leases as a benefit for executives. Loss and deterioration due to lack of funding on public lands along with increasing pressure means lessened quality of hunting there....thus the average guy is giving up hunting for something else. So, unless you have relatives/friends with private land, own your own or pay monies to lease or hunt ranches/outfitters, you are stuck with public land. In some areas of the country it is still plentiful and can offer a quality hunt....but that supply is quickly dwindling.

H&Hhunter said:

I’ll take my freedom to hunt as a I like where I like in America for as long as I can.

Click to expand...

Me too, but I am fortunate. I have family land to deer hunt. I have good friends to have land I turkey hunt. I also am blessed with several very large areas of public land within a few minutes of where I live, that still offer a pretty decent hunting experience. If it weren't for that, I don't know if I'd still be hunting, or willing to pay a substantial amount of money to hunt.

buck460XVR said:

Sadly, in many areas of the U.S., this is the direction hunting is going. Limited access to private land, means folks either have to cough up big bucks to buy their own land, pay lease fees or hunt private ranches/clubs.

Click to expand...

Well sure. Most people did not buy their land so that others may have the opportunity to use it.

Double Naught Spy said:

Well sure. Most people did not buy their land so that others may have the opportunity to use it.

Click to expand...

At least not for free............

Double Naught Spy said:

Well sure. Most people did not buy their land so that others may have the opportunity to use it.

Click to expand...

....but that is a new trend. Kinda the point I was making. Growing up as a kid, I could hunt in any direction, as far as I could walk, regardless of who owned the land. That's just how it was. Very few, if any, folks actually "posted" their land. Even those that did usually gave permission to hunt if and when asked. Folks did not own land just so they could hunt it. They owned land so they could work it. There was no such thing as "recreational" property. No such thing as "LandWatch" and "Whitetail Properties". Folks were not possessive of the deer on their land. When neighbors hunted together and got deer, the deer were shared. Horn was not the object of the hunt. Sad, that so many folks never got to enjoy those times.

buck460XVR said:

....but that is a new trend. Kinda the point I was making. Growing up as a kid, I could hunt in any direction, as far as I could walk, regardless of who owned the land. That's just how it was. Very few, if any, folks actually "posted" their land. Even those that did usually gave permission to hunt if and when asked. Folks did not own land just so they could hunt it. They owned land so they could work it. There was no such thing as "recreational" property. No such thing as "LandWatch" and "Whitetail Properties". Folks were not possessive of the deer on their land. When neighbors hunted together and got deer, the deer were shared. Horn was not the object of the hunt. Sad, that so many folks never got to enjoy those times.

Click to expand...

And then a bunch of jackarses over the last 50-70 years left gates open, left trash behind, went muddin' in pastures, invited their friends out who had not been granted permission, shot livestock, etc. etc. etc. and took for granted the gift of having access to land not their own and really screwed it up for the rest of us. I will tell you what, I have let some people hunt my place that I will never allow back again. I know I have told this story before, but I have a 400 yard rifle range on my property with a nice backstop and a guy I let hunt deer on my place posted target and shot a bunch of .30-06 rounds into it trying to get his scope zeroed. WTH??? I asked him, "Why did you shoot the hell out of my tree?" and he replied that it was just easy to do it by the deer stand and besides, "it's just a tree." I get it. He doesn't own it. He didn't value it, so it doesn't matter.

GONE.

It isn't that the landowners have changed so much as it is the people wanting free access. Even back in the day, people did not buy their land to grant access to others, they often did, but they bought land to own it and they put their very own hard earned money into it.

George P said:

At least not for free............

Click to expand...

Like those people at Hertz with all those cars. Oddly, they don't get people use them for free.

Here in Illinois, once the whitetail Mecca of the east, we don't have a deer population excess. Rather, through an understaffed DNR, pressure from insurance companies, EHD, CW, and poachers we have had a drastic reduction of the deer population. My land, though small, supports the hunting of me, my two sons and a couple of nephews. I neither need, nor want any additional help from the state, or, for that matter, the federal government.

whughett said:

They can if there are covenants attached to the deed. It’s why I would never buy in a deed restricted development.

Click to expand...

It's not just developments. About 20 years ago i looked at 40 acres in Wyoming. Mentioned to the realtor that it was a great place to hunt: She was mortified. When the real estate agency broke up the ranch they inserted no hunting covenants in all tracts.

German style hunting works well in Germany. As does french style hunting in France. In Sweden I don't own the wild animals on my land until they lay dead on the ground. I think you will find its the same in Germany. Much of the hunting we do in Europe and Scandinavia is Social hunting. Thats hunting with friends or hunting team. Its nothing to do with socialism or being a commi. Much of the hunting ground in Europe is privately owned. The government don't own the wild animals apart from wolves, lynx and eagles and a few other animals that can only be hunted under licence or not at all.
In Germany, If a hunting team take out a lease for hunting from a private land owner or forest company the lease holder is liable for any damage wild boar cause to agriculture. It can get quite expensive if they don't keep on top of the boar.
Its not true that hunting is just for the rich. Plenty of working class people hunt. I left school at 15 with no qualifications. 56 years later I've still not got any. I've never had a job that payed fantastic money. I come from a family where no body hunts but I've been shooting since i was 16 and am still hunting and have hunted all over Europe plus a couple of trips to Canada. If it was not for the Virus I would have booked a hunting trip somewhere in Europe by now. Hopefully I'll be back in the UK for Fallow and Muntjac hunting in November.
Will be out over the weekend after another boar. Life is so hard for us poor pensioners

Double Naught Spy said:

And then a bunch of jackarses over the last 50-70 years left gates open, left trash behind, went muddin' in pastures, invited their friends out who had not been granted permission, shot livestock, etc. etc. etc. and took for granted the gift of having access to land not their own and really screwed it up for the rest of us.

Click to expand...

While we lived in West Virginia a farmer in Taylor county lost his farm because a hunter scoundrel fell out of his tree stand and was badly injured. The guy, who hunted on the property for many years, fell from the tree stand he erected. The jury found the farmer liable, the judge ordered the farm sold to pay the hunter. Numerous farmers banded together, bought the farm at the sheriff auction and deeded the place to the farmer. My Dad and i had permission to hunt a large property in Taylor county for many years. The entire county was soon posted and the farmer, who was in a CCC camp with Dad, revoked our permission to hunt.

Sounds like a bad idea here in the U.S. Now if New York does it I wouldn't care. No the government doesn't own the deer. They are wild. They are managed by state departments. But the government is only allowed to trespass on private property or any jurisdiction by certain laws. No we are not going to give up private property rights. I lived in Germany. No thanks. There are reasons we came here to get away from Europe.

d2wing said:

Sounds like a bad idea here in the U.S. Now if New York does it I wouldn't care. No the government doesn't own the deer. They are wild. They are managed by state departments. But the government is only allowed to trespass on private property or any jurisdiction by certain laws. No we are not going to give up private property rights. I lived in Germany. No thanks. There are reasons we came here to get away from Europe.

Click to expand...

Not sure how we can say the Federal and State government does not ostensibly own the animals here in the US? You cannot hunt a single species in the USA without the blessing from and frequently a fee paid to your local state government and hunting migratory birds required the blessing of both the State and Federal government.

If you are required to get a government's permission to shoot the deer they are not your deer they are the governments.

mcb said:

Not sure how we can say the Federal and State government does not ostensibly own the animals here in the US? You cannot hunt a single species in the USA without the blessing from and frequently a fee paid to your local state government and hunting migratory birds required the blessing of both the State and Federal government.

If you are required to get a government's permission to shoot the deer they are not your deer they are the governments.

Click to expand...

No they are not owned by anybody, they are wild. Hunting is regulated, habitat is managed, but no owns them unless you have a game farm. Probably a moot point. Maybe you are correct where you live. Are you speaking as a legal matter or practical matter? Because as a practical matter I would agree.
Also property rights and wild game ownership are separate in my mind but many differ in that regard. In some places the land ownership and state ownership is the law or assumption. Maybe I am only right in my mind lol.

d2wing said:

No they are not owned by anybody, they are wild. Hunting is regulated, habitat is managed, but no owns them unless you have a game farm. Probably a moot point. Maybe you are correct where you live. Are you speaking as a legal matter or practical matter? Because as a practical matter I would agree.

Click to expand...

As a practical matter. I agree they are wild animals going were they will, when they will. But if I have to pay the state for the privilege to hunt and can only hunt at the times of the year the government say I can then that sure feels like they own them not me.

daniel craig said:

Whereas the German model is more, you might own the land but you don’t own the animals on the land and they need management for the good of the population and the people.

Click to expand...

Totally agree. Suppose a land owner had quite a number of deer on his land, over populated and CWD is abundant. Does the land owner have the right to say, heck with you. I do care, no shooting or harvesting deer on my land.So who actually own the wildlife on Private land? Would it be ok, to loose a states whole deer herd because of one land owner and his rights?