High Fenced Deer Hunting. You have to see!!!

I see it as a pretty sad commentary on our society as a whole, and the general decline in our values. Shooting animals in these conditions is sort of like cheating at solitaire. The sport is the hunt. With all that said, at the end of the day the Jimmy Houstons of the world are just as pleased with a monumental lie as they would be with the real accomplishment. Indeed, the level of stupidity is even beyond that. I don't think many of them can even make the distinction. For them if you can trick someone into thinking that you have accomplished something, it's every bit as good as if you really did it. Disgusting.

I don't understand the knock on Texas. There are tens of thousands of ranches where folks hunt deer. I doubt there are more than a few hundred "Big Deal, Big $$$" ranches, and I doubt that all--or all that many--of them are as stinko as what's seen on TV.

For one thing, sitting near a feeder in a box blind is not very productive for mule deer. So, forget the TV scenes you've watched. The whole Panhandle is mostly mulies. West of the Pecos, mostly mulies. Some areas, you can drive around and see deer. Others, you pretty much have to either walk and kick Ol' Bucky out of bed, or learn the country well enough to figure where to wait for him--and that might be several mornings or several evenings. Mule deer bucks go to water only once or twice a week, down here in the desert.

Anyhow, how many of you have done anything? Written/faxed/emailed any of the outdoor TV channels? Or said anything to any of the gunzines? Or to the NRA? Hmmm?

Art

I see it as a pretty sad commentary on our society as a whole, and the general decline in our values.

Click to expand...

Is shooting a wild animal limited to a few acres of land any worse, from an ethical standpoint, than raising a domestic animal in a pen and then scrambling its brains with a bolt gun?

Is the man using iron sights more "ethical" than the man using a scope?

How about the handgun hunter? The bow hunter? The knife hunter? Does this list represent an ethical hierarchy with hunters on each step of the ladder holding a higher moral ground than those below?

And hell, for those of you worrying that "canned" hunting is simply giving the anti-hunters ammunition, have you considered that by allowing them to dictate what kind of hunting is and is not ethical you are essentially handing them control of the sport?

I honestly don't know what to think about the subject. On the one hand, my personal views are extreme to the point of believing that the man with the .30-378 and the lazer rangefinder is a slob hunter and doesn't really have the first inkling of what hunting is supposed to be about. On the other hand, the deer doesn't care whether it was killed with a .30-378 or a .30-06 or a .58 round ball. Or an exploding claymore, for that matter. Dead is dead, so how do ethics even enter the picture when the result is the same?

Well, domestic animals are raised for the specific purpose of food. That's easy enough.

"Game" animals are to be taken in fair chase, where the animal has a chance to evade/avoid the hunter. That's a whole different deal. No correlation between hunting and food factories.

Part of the ethics of hunting is for a clean, quick kill. That's best done with good sighting and knowledge of the trajectory and distance to the animal.

When you reach the age of bifocal or trifocal glasses, you'll think the telescopic sight was the greatest thing since underarm sweet-smellum. I gayrawndangtee you!

A laser range-finder is a fun toy, but totally unnecessary for somewhere around 99% of all shots. I really doubt many people actually use them in the field, even if they have them along. Sure, check to see if the deer is 83 yards out, or 87, but it won't affect the shot one way or another. Hey, folks wear camo, too. Doesn't really help them any, hunting Bambi.

One fact, to me, stands out above all others: Only the hunter and/or the gardener provides his own food as a do-it-yourselfer. Everybody else hires someone to do the scutwork for them.

Art

Well, domestic animals are raised for the specific purpose of food. That's easy enough.

Click to expand...

And? Animals is animals, and dead is dead.

"Game" animals are to be taken in fair chase, where the animal has a chance to evade/avoid the hunter.

Click to expand...

Sez you. Your reply is, IMO, one small step away from "Because I said so!"

That's a whole different deal. No correlation between hunting and food factories.

Click to expand...

I completely disagree, based on the "animals is animals, dead is dead" platform.

Saying that the places in these videos are representative of most high-fence hunting is like saying that that the latest workplace shooter with an AK is representative of THR. IOW, know what you're talking about.

I have gone on a few high-fence hunts and typically see fewer animals than open-range areas in the Hill Country of Texas. I went on one 700-acre high-fence hunt and saw two animals all day. On another hunt on a 2,300-acre area I saw maybe two dozen deer and/or exotics over a one-hour period, but perhaps only one potential shooter and no trophy animals. I have never been to a high-fence ranch where there are drugged, wounded, malnourished, diseased, abused, neglected, or "staged" animals. I am sure there are a few places like that. There are more than a few irresponsible shooters in the world too, but I don't have anything to do with them either.

Properly managed high-fence hunting has a place in the world of recreational hunting just like the remote open-range areas. I have done both and enjoyed them both thoroughly.

.38 Special, I really don't understand how you get from my comment to yours, with:

Art: "Game" animals are to be taken in fair chase, where the animal has a chance to evade/avoid the hunter."

.38: "Sez you. Your reply is, IMO, one small step away from "Because I said so!"

Not just me saying so; I'm no danged guru that originates such ideas. You can start with folks like Russell Annabel and continue on through Robert Ruark. You can include folks like Jeff Cooper and most all writers about hunting since long before I ever picked up my first Daisy Red Ryder. Heck, include Ernest Thompson Seton and Aldo Leopold.

I imagine you've heard of the Boone & Crockett's ideas about game animals and fair chase. I don't pretend to be their guru, either.

, Art

That was a roundabout way of saying that "'Game' animals are to be taken in fair chase, where the animal has a chance to evade/avoid the hunter" is a human construct. Viewed in a coldly logical light, it really doesn't make any sense that hitting an immobile animal in the head with a bolt gun is fine, but shooting an animal within a ten acre enclosure is "unethical".

And again, you will find people that argue hunting with a .30-378 and a laser range finder is unethical, or that any rifle hunting is unethical, or scope use, or smokeless powder, etc, etc. Heck, I was married to a woman who loved her filet medium rare, but believed all hunting was immoral.

Human constructs, all.

Now, I can actually understand the argument that holds that "canned" hunting is ammunition for the anti-hunters. It's a valid point. What I don't understand, though, is the righteous outrage certain folks show whenever they hear of a hunt that doesn't meet their personal level of "ethics". As far as I am concerned, the only truly unethical hunter is the one who's willing to shoot at -- and thus seriously risk wounding and losing -- big game animals 500+ yards away, yet the majority seem to consider that "cutting edge", rather than unethical.

The bottom line, for me, is that our current sense of hunting ethics seems a bit skewed, to the point that it's more ethical to wound and lose game to long distance sniping than it is to take an essentially "sure thing" shot at a game animal in restricted territory.

, .38

hunting is good
The deer lives a wonderful life of eating natrual food, mating, roaming wild, living how God intended. Cows don't, they are often kept in pens filthy with manure given feed and hormones to fatten them up. After a boring life behind bars often knee deep in excrement they are "humanly" killed? I'm designing a warehouse at work that will be built on a site that use to be a dairy. We can't infiltrate storm water to replenish the water table because of the cow crap build up that will contaminate the water table with pathogens, bacteria, etc. And we have to remove 3' of manure to get down to natural earth so the building will be built on solid ground. Those dairy cows sure had a nice life. This is why hunting is better than "pretend" hunting. And why eating an animal you shot in the woods is better than eating a bigmac ethically speaking.

Flame away, I bet some rancher wants too. Just remember, as soon as I leave California and get a decent size piece of land I'll be getting a cow or two, they make great pets, and better burgers.

As animal husbandry developed, and/or as wilderness became much less wild, the actual need to hunt for meat declined. But, folks still had/have the desire to hunt.

That led, over this last couple of hundred years, to the idea of "ethics" in hunting. Fair chase became part of our deal. We've progressed to adding that the kill itself be quick and as painless as possible.

But any sort of ethics is a human construct, whether about the hunt or the ideas that go into a Constitution and BOR.

Part of this human construct, then, is in the discussions we have about the use of high-tech gadgets in our hunting, whether it be GPS, laser range finders, scope sights, camo, no-smellum soap, whatever.

No simple, non-complex answers, really. So, I stay mainly with the idea that a game animal should have the chance to outsmart me if he can, and if I win it should be as quick and as painless as possible...

, Art

I have intentionally avoided watching this for one simple reason, I knew how sickening it would be. I also knew how angry I would be that some one actually refered to this as hunting.

Like shooting Fish in a barrel.

This one company I worked for had a warehouse on 10 acres of land, part of it wooded It was of course posted as non hunting area with high fences and the deer that lived there grew real big and become very docile. You could walk a trail behind the warehouse and a few times we walked up on deer and a few large bucks and they would barely flinch. You could almost pet them.

The sick thing was every hunting season we would find a hole in the fence and find a dead headless deer or two with a crossbow bolt in it. The meat was totally wasted, and some moron somewhere has a stuffed deer head hanging in his den that he probably walked up to and shot at point blank range, cut off it head for a trophy and left the meat to rot. How can you be proud of that.

Well, I am quite sorry, but I don't consider going to a high fence ranch and killing a tame red stag is "hunting". It's like driving out in the pasture and shooting a calf. Now, you have to kill the calf to eat it, for sure. And, it's not unethical to kill a calf for meat, done all the time, but I don't call it hunting. I do, however, bait deer. In Texas, feeders are not only legal, they've become a way of life. So, I supposed one man's ethical hunting practices are another man's outrage. I don't know many hunters who think shooting a pinned up animal is ethical sport, though. It does, however, explain how all those huge-y-mongous deer are shot every week on the outdoor hunting shows. Not all of 'em are shot this way, though. I saw one in eastern Montana the other day. They were filming the deer out in the fields and filmed the guy shooting a buck from a bluff at about 200 yards, maybe a little better. I think the shooter was Larry Weisund (sp) IIRC, grey headed guy with the beard that looks like Santa and works for Thompson Center I guess, because that's all he ever uses. His TC was in .405 Winchester, or some old caliber. Anyway, I don't think that was filmed inside a 5 acre fenced pin, so some of these shows are ethical I reckon. They ain't all cheatin'. I can't imagine a guy like him would be a part of such, being he was a wildlife biologist in a former life. OTOH, I know nothing about Jimmy Houston other than he won some bass fishing tournaments.

Our society has "developed" into a total fast food microwave mentality. If I've got enough money, I can buy success. If I'm rich, why should I have to spend a lot of time in fair chase like the unwashed masses?

I guess it's an individual thing in terms of ethics, but this seems obviously way over the line. I haven't liked the idea of pen type game ranches for a long time, mainly from a disease standpoint.

You'd think people would learn. Ray Scott screwed up Bass Masters with greed. Noel Feather took the easy way out. Jimmy Houston and all the gang here. How can you go in public and not catch a bunch of crap after doing this?? That's the part that would bother me most. Everybody that knows you thinks you're a thief and liar, but maybe that doesn't bother some people.

If you live your life so you never have anything to be ashamed of, you'll never get embarrased.

Sad.

My state senator is a friend of mine. I think it's time he gets tuned in.

Before my dad would take me hunting, he made me take the hunter education class. It was there and from my dad, that I learned that you dont shoot a deer that is on the side of the road, dont shoot an antlered deer when it is antlerless season, or any animal out of season. The problem is that no one is teaching this anymore. Its all about the mount on the wall.

I just starting bow hunting last season and use a range finder to mark the distance from my stand to different trees that are about 30- 40 yards out so I know what pin to use. (I've missed soo many deer b/c I couldn't tell the yardage).

For me, I love the feeling I get when a deer; anysize, any sex, comes with in shooting range. I get a high from it..otherwise known as buck fever. haha I process the meat myself and perfer it to beef anyday.

I just dont think that we are teaching the younger generations to appreciate the art of hunting, that you will have more windy, wet freezing days in a stand than you will actually getting a deer, but thats what makes it worth it!

I just starting bow hunting last season and use a range finder to mark the distance from my stand to different trees that are about 30- 40 yards out so I know what pin to use. (I've missed soo many deer b/c I couldn't tell the yardage).

Click to expand...

I know a "traditional" archer who argues quite passionately against bow sights, let alone rangefinders. Considers them unethical.

Humans. Go figure, eh?

SUBMOAS,

What is the position on high fenced hunts for Prairie Dogs? I recall some fencing around the Bennett town........TAPTAP!

For over 20 years when i lived in England i culled deer in a deer park. !00acres with a high fence round. We neck shot all the deer and it took a fair bit of skill to get the beast you wanted.Not quite shooting fish in a barrel But it was only culling not sport. must have shot dozens of trophy bucks but have never kept one set of antlers from a park deer. The wild fallow deer i shot meant something the park ones never did. There will always be people out there that are to lazy and unethical to hunt properly

this thread is making me hungry.

Fenced hunting

I don't have any problem with some fenced hunting. There are plenty of ranches that have thousands of acres of land with animals that are just as wild as you would see on your own land. The problem is what is the magic number how many acres of land does it take for the hunting to still be ethical? I know I wouldn't feel comfortable hunting a deer if it was penned up on 20 acres, but if there was 200 I might be ok with it. In some areas of the country using bait is severly frowned upon as unethical or illegal, but in other parts of the country it is deemed foolish to not have any bait by your tree stand.

This sad film exemplifies the prostitution of hunting, a traditionally working class activity, to the rich, super rich and obscenely rich who want to own everything!

The owners of these "hunting" operations are just one of the many types of "lickspittles" who service these rich bastards who care for nothing but themselves! There are many ranch operators who do good work and are responsible stewards of wildlife, but these are NOT the people who do what we saw in this film!

I grew up hunting duck and goose on the eastern shore of Maryland. Those farms we leased in the 60s-70s are now owned by wealthy lobbyists and corporate pirates who use these properties for "special" business including bribeing policiticans to get what they want to the detriment of the rest us.

In Europe only the aristocrat class was able to hunt. We're seeing the same thing happening here as "plutocrats" with the $$ get away with murder of our middle class American society, economy and traditions.

That's my opinion and I could be....
streakr