Hunting laws/Canned hunts

[Art Eatman]

From a thread in the Hunt forum at The Firing Line: http://real-hunters.com/full.swf

It's worth a listen. It is stated that Jimmy Houston of the Outdoor Channel was a willing participant in one of these canned hunts. The Outdoor Channel can be contacted at http://www.outdoorchannel.com

This sort of unethical hunt has been made illegal in many states, even prior to 2004. We need to try to ensure that this is nationwide.

Anti-hunting sentiment is tied to anti-gun sentiment. If hunting is made more difficult by public outrage, the sale of firearms will be reduced. It is possible that the ripple effect could create financial problems for the manufacturers--and that hurts all of us as shooters, even if we aren't all hunters.

Art

 

[EarlofSandwich]

Hmmm. I've always been ambivalent about these things. I frown upon "canned hunts", personally would never do it.
But it is big business in certain areas and you are going to upset quite a few folks if you ban it.

 

[bamawrx]

I'm not the one to be a fan of banning almost anything. If you think about it, whats the difference between a slaughter house and a canned hunt?

I won't be supporting any efforts to ban such things. A canned hunt would be more accurately called an assured harvest of wild game, but its certainly not hunting. I hope the media doesn't use canned hunting footage and then present it to us as real hunting. I would have a real problem with that.

 

[Art Eatman]

Sport hunting in the U.S. has traditionally revolved around the concept of ethics and "fair chase". Fair chase means that the game animal has some reasonable amount of opportunity to escape the hunter, or to not be found at all.

Drugged deer in a three-acre pen does not in any way meet the criterion of fair anything, much less fair chase.

Note that in this 2004 case, there were some 37 charges brought. Note that the state of Wisconsin investigated some 570 of these operations. Note that such hunts are banned in Wisconsin. I've lost track of the particular year, but I believe such hunts were banned in Texas around 2001.

There is not only hunter repugnance, but there is "just folks" repugnance. If this sort of unethical immorality becomes widespread public knowledge, we easily could see all manner of laws passed which hurt all hunters--and that includes those who care about the ethics of the hunt.

Further, there is evidence of a tie between these game farms and Chronic Wasting Disease. CWD is harmful to humans. It cannot be kept solely inside game farms, as animals do escape from time to time. Further, it is quite possible for an animal to be sold from the farm and carry the disease into the wild population.

It's all about ethics, character and responsibilty. My personal opinion is that these game-farm, canned-hunt people are irresponsibly doing harm to all hunters and to the wild herds of deer and elk. Earning money is nice, but when that goal is sought in an unethical manner, "I'm agin it."

Art

 

[Rem700SD]

I'd pay close attention to who/what is defining the term "canned hunt" I'd venture to say that virtually all of us feel that shooting a creature in a cage or small enclosure is unethical, and a "canned" hunt.

Is hunting on a 1000 acre managed preserve the same definition?

 

[.38 Special]

So what's the difference between a canned hunt and fishing a stocked lake? And how is shooting an animal in a fenced-off area immoral while hitting one with a bolt gun on the killing room floor isn't?

I'm personally not interested in canned hunting. It's not sport, as far as I concerned. But I don't see any logic to the arguments against it, either.

 

[TexasRifleman]

Is hunting on a 1000 acre managed preserve the same definition?

Or putting a corn feeder 100 feet from your deer stand, as is done in pretty much all of Texas?

It is confusing to me as well exactly what a "canned hunt" is.

I think having a feeder and lick next to the deer stand is as "canned" as it gets, yet that's perfectly legal and accepted in Texas.

I don't do it by the way, totally unethical to my way of thinking.

Same with 100 mile per hour bass boats with $10,000 fish finders. What exactly is the point?

 

[Art Eatman]

Texas SIGman, did you listen to the description as given in the tape? About drugged deer in a three-acre pen, as just one example?

Does the potential for cries for severe legislative restrictions on all of us from the anti-hunting crowd mean nothing to you? We constantly talk about idiotic proposals for gun-control legislation, here; do you think it can't happen in the world of hunting?

I'm sorry, but if you're confused about what is a "canned hunt", you haven't been paying attention for several years, now. Canned hunts have been talked about in newspapers, TV, The Firing Line and here at The High Road.

Simplest put: A canned hunt is a staged and phony situation where the game animal has no chance to evade or avoid the shooter. It typically involves a very small high-fenced area where the animal is confined within easy shot-range.

In the thread-subject example, these confines are given as three to six acres. I note that a three-acre square is 120 yards on a side. That's a lead-pipe cinch, a "Gimme" shot. Even Mr. Magoo could make it--and even if he missed, the deer can't run away.

Art

 

[22-rimfire]

Art +1++

 

[AnthonyRSS]

I don't think it should be unlawful. I can't see how that is different from many other ways we harvest meat. As long as those participating aren't aversely affecting the wildlife, I don't see a problem.

Its not my thing, but whatever.

Like bamawrx, I am not for banning anything.

 

[Zundfolge]

Does the potential for cries for severe legislative restrictions on all of us from the anti-hunting crowd mean nothing to you? We constantly talk about idiotic proposals for gun-control legislation, here; do you think it can't happen in the world of hunting?

I'm sorry, but if you're confused about what is a "canned hunt", you haven't been paying attention for several years, now. Canned hunts have been talked about in newspapers, TV, The Firing Line and here at The High Road.

Problem is that once upon a time an "Assault Rifle" was a select fire intermediate caliber rifle, now its any semi automatic rifle.

If you allow the banning of the drugged deer in a three acre pen "canned hunts" you're going to find the definition of a "canned hunt" morph into hunting any animal in an area surrounded by a fence ... even a 1,000 acre pasture or a 10,000 acre game preserve.

The anti-hunting people aren't going to go away if we just agree with them on this one ban any more than the anti-gun people are going to go away if we just agree with them on a .50BMG ban or "Saturday Night Special" ban.

The best tact to take with canned hunts is to shun those who engage in them. Social pressure is a much better way to adjust people's behavior then legislation.


Canned hunts sound kinda boring to me but if one was wheelchair bound or otherwise had limited mobility I might understand the appeal.

 

[Byron Quick]

Some of y'all are being purposely obtuse about Art's point.

And, if you are hunters or gunowners, you are not thinking in a manner that is conducive to your own self interest.

I would tend to agree with the 'it doesn't need to be banned, it's no different than killing a cow in a slaughterhouse' crowd if this were the best of all possilbe worlds. Only one problem with that stance, guys-this ain't the best of all possible worlds. There are probably very serious consequences to letting canned hunts proliferate and outrage the general public.

Here in Georgia, the majority of voters are not hunters-the vast majority. 74% of those nonhunters support hunting when it is related to them as ethical and fair chase. Only a minority of these folks support even trophy hunting. Now suppose something motivated those people to join up with PETA idiots and Brady bunch idiots? In case you haven't noticed, you're talking about a potential voting bloc of a solid majority of the electorate. Do you really want them voting in a referendum over the existence of hunting?

I don't and that means that I will be an ethical and courteous hunter. I won't have a gutted deer exposed to view on my trailer. I think such is spurious but the urbanites get upset seeing body cavities. And they vote. I don't throw carcasses or guts in streams or roadsides. I use calibers large enough to reduce the chances of wounded deer wandering up into former city folks' yards. They get all soggy and hard to light.

You can ignore them if you want. But there are more of them than there are of us. If we tick them off bad enough, we'll all regret it. The canned hunts will be banned right along with our hunts.

We don't have the choice of complete live and let live anarchistic freedom. I wish we did. The choice we have is to clean our house or to see it cleaned for us. And we won't like the cleaning methods used, I guarantee you.

Zundfolge,

Wildlife Management Areas here in Georgia address the disabled. Many have access areas that are restricted to the disabled and their assistants. Until the siging of the interstate compact among several states affecting their residents hunting in other compact states, the only people who could use crossbows to hunt in Georgia during archery seasons were the disabled. No, sir. The disabled can hunt ethically and fair chase. Real sport hunting. A canned hunt for a disabled person is patronization. My father hunted doves in a wheelchair. He'd be the first person to leave each dove hunt he attended. Not because of pain or exhaustion but because-being the best wingshot-he would be the first to reach his limit.

 

[LadySmith]

I will be an ethical and courteous hunter.

I’ve been flirting with the idea of going hunting in order to not be a hypocrite in my carnivorous ways. Currently, there is a disconnection in me between animals and meat. I simply cannot equate that slab of steak on my plate to a living, breathing cow peacefully munching grass in a pasture. I have no real world experience to connect the two. Sure, I know better on a cerebral level, but that’s just so much blah, blah, blah.
Canned hunts fill me, a potential future hunter, with repugnance for the whole endeavor. It’s unfair, it’s unethical, and it pushes fence-sitters over the side to the antis. Sure, dead is dead, but there is such a thing as death with honor. To track an animal on its own turf where there is a fair chance that it can escape is the very definition of hunting to me. To pen it in is mere slaughter. If I wanted slaughter, I could just go buy a rabbit and beat it to death in my back yard. Just let it tucker itself out running back and forth between fences until I could take a whack at it.
But I believed that there was more to hunting and hunters than just killing. I believed that there is an almost spiritual connection to be had when you go out there in the wild, go hunting, and then bring something back. That it had something to do with respect, fair play and skill. Or at least I did. If it’s all about just doing whatever it takes to bring home some carcass, then forget it. I’ll just stay home and watch “Bambi.”

 

[dragongoddess]

"Canned hunts sound kinda boring to me but if one was wheelchair bound or otherwise had limited mobility I might understand the appeal."


As one of those who are limited in mobility(not wheelchair bound) I would not even consider such a hunt.

 

[TexasRifleman]

I'm sorry, but if you're confused about what is a "canned hunt", you haven't been paying attention for several years, now.

No no, sorry I guess I wasn't clear. I'm saying I agree with you 100% and in fact would want to broaden the definition of "canned hunt" to include some of the less than sportsman like things I mentioned like having 3 feeders inside a 100 foot circle from a deer blind, that's as bad as what you mention.

It's disgusting, unethical and on top of that I can't even figure out why anyone would WANT to participate in one.

I'm with you, I just didn't 'splain it very good

 

[22-rimfire]

Ladysmith, I believe it is time for your first hunt. You need to experience it whether or not you hunt again or not. But, it is kind of like "your first time", it needs to mean something and I make the comparision of fair chase hunting with "the back seat of a Chevy" in the dating world. One way is a lot more satisfying and memorable in a good way. Your choice.

There are lots of people (I hesitate to call them sportsmen.) who would be quite content sitting in a blind with three feeders. I think about some of the people I have known, usually the people that most would consider successful, and I know they would be more than happy to pay to take a large buck in a 1 acre fence. The drive to "win" is beyond understanding sometimes and taking a large buck in a pen is just a way for them to "win". They mount the head, brag to their business associates about their hunt (lie if they have to, they don't care), and go back to work trying to squeeze another 2-cents profit out of their business at the expense of their employees. It is one of the reasons I will never be rich. I just can't do these things. There is such a thing as fair chase in business as well as hunting. Some people have absolutely no conscious, especially when it comes to wealth and money. Hunting is no different given the opportunity to "win". Excuse my rant.

 

[BigFatKen]

private land and water

WI allowed baiting for bears until 1986. Then the hunters split. Stalk and bow hunters wanted to stop baiting. Baiting hunters wanted to ban tree stands. Rifle hunters wanted to ban bows as it was inhumane to try to kill a 600 pound bear with "a pointed stick". Everyone got their wish; bear hunting was supended in 1986 until it could be worked out in Court.
Beware of what you wish for.

See also: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=178845 My current hunting land, not fenced.

I used to own 207 acres in WI. It had its own lake. It was a legally public lake but very, very hard to get to via public waterways. Some anglers wanted to fish the lake. I told all were welcome to come out and fish with me. This was not what they wanted. They wanted to just drive in with their friends, who I did not know, and go fishing. With today's liability laws, this I would not do.

I limed and fertilized the two acres of mowed grass around the house. Results: five deer in 1991; two bow, two gun, one muzzel loader. Some hunters complained what I did was not fair. After I did all the work, some hunters who would not talk with me all summer, asked permission to deer hunt next to my stand.

The WI herd was building up by then and WI then allowed baiting.. result: baiting "wars". Hunters brought out corn by the ton, putting out no more than ten gallons at a time, but some put out ten gallons twice a day, also legal.

I'm not sure now, but WI was considering banning bating again; too many hunters "claiming" public land as private because they baited it.


Here was a typical day's catch in Spring.

http://www.alabamabass.com/Web/crappie1.jpg

And guys were too stuburn to call me and ask to come out and be my fishing partner for a day. This was not a stocked lake. Just fished very little.

 

[22-rimfire]

We have had discussions before on the topic of fair chase. I suspect that many of the videos that are made for the hunting shows on TV are filmed in areas where the hunting environment is somewhat controlled. I venture to guess, perhaps 50%.

I think the video presents a very poor vision of hunting. Thank goodness, it is not the norm. It also shows that deer hunting in many places is becoming or has become a money game. Yes, I undestand that it costs money to put up stands, have feeders, plant food plots, etc. Is a farmer's grain field a food plot? It is certainly a human food plot. It becomes a question of where you draw the line. As was mentioned, be careful of what you wish for.

 

[Biker]

Now that's a stringer, Ken!

Biker

 

[BigFatKen]

My wife will be going to the "bows and does" for women at:
http://www.whiteoakplantation.com/

She is going more to meet like minded women than shoot a doe. That she can do on our land.

We also like to visit http://www.fivestarplantation.com It has many thousand acres. The deer are not fenced. You do have to pay of course. So, the question comes up; what about the guy who can't afford his own land or the ~$1500/buck fee these lodges get?

I think its like the fact that some men buy new cars for $25,000 and sell them a few years old for 1/3. The smart used car buyer has been helped by the richer guy.

Not everyone can afford to own 8,000 acres or buy a new SUV every year. That is our system.

 

[BigFatKen]

hey, Biker

Notice the 1/32" stringer line is cutting Steve's hand causing him to wince. This is my nephew Steve I have written about on occation. (A 50 year old widower if any women are reading. see: http://www.artworkbyandy.com/ )

38 acre Cramer Lake in Iron County was highly cyclical. In 1990, there were so many fish, it was common to power to the SW corner of the lake and float back and catch 5 prop cut fish among 100's more. This does not count the fish cut in half or wounded so badly, they will not hit a tube jig. The winter of 91-92 had a die-off. '92s fish were short but got fat real quick. sixteen 9.5" crappies weighed ~10 pounds and filleted out almost 4 pounds of meat. About a 38% recover ratio, which is a high number.

http://www.whiteoakplantation.com/hunting/schedule.html
If anyone thinks that a Two Day Hunts $1250.00
November 27-29
November 29 - December 1
December 4-6
December 6-8 are open

fee to hunt at a lodge is stiff, look into buying the Cramer Lake place. It is listed now at 1.3 million and the owner pays $30,000 per year in taxes. I got out at a good time.

 

[Zundfolge]

Don't get me wrong, I don't support canned hunts and would certainly never go on one.

However, I'm concerned about using laws to end them because the PeTA types will just use such laws as a stair step toward banning ALL hunting (on their way to banning eating meat).

I believe we can simply boycott outfitters that run canned hunts, scorn and shun those who go on them and that will be more effective than increasing the power of our enemies by creating more and more laws.

I still think my "Assault Rifle" analogy stands here ... today a canned hunt is a canned hunt, but you make it against the law and the PeTA types will incrementally expand the definition of canned hunt to include any hunting in an "enclosed space", then they'll expand the definition of an enclosed space until there is no place in the US where ANY hunting will be allowed (because ultimately North America is an "enclosed space" fenced off with two oceans and the polar ice cap).


More Laws is rarely a good thing and I hate to see us run out and support yet another law because we think it will be a preemptive strike against those who want to outlaw hunting and gun ownership completely. I see it as playing into their hands.

 

[Thin Black Line]

I would think peer pressure against those who engage in canned hunts
should be the first step to take.

 

[ID_shooting]

"So, the question comes up; what about the guy who can't afford his own land or the ~$1500/buck fee these lodges get?"

In ten years, NOTHING, NADA, ZIP, ZERO. Go buy your dinner at Wal-mart.

20 years ago, opening day was a school holiday. There were somany students and teachers gone, there was no way for the school to conduct business so the admin just closed it and didn't expect people to show up.

Now, you will be charged with truancy if your parrents pulled you out of school for hunting season.

Right now Idaho enjoys free-range hunting. More and more hunting ranches are comming here. Some in what was once the best parts of the state. My fear is as these ranches pop up, the growing sentiment will be, "why do we have people wondering the woods with guns every year when they can just go to a ranch and hunt. After all, I sure don't want to be shot while I am riding my mountain bike through the woods trying to enjoy nature."

I have allready heard it at Cabelas and Sprtsman's Wearhouse.

Eventually, it will morph to "Since you can only hunt on game ranches, why do people need guns? After all, can't they just rent them from the ranch?"

Guess what, most gun owners aren't hunters, but the majority of voters do not know this. They equate gun ownership to hunting. Take away hunting, take away guns cuz there is no need. The two ARE directly related.

I personally despise hunting ranches. They are a huge pot mark on my once pristine state.

"Canned hunts sound kinda boring to me but if one was wheelchair bound or otherwise had limited mobility I might understand the appeal."

I do not have much that would pass on THR for this statement other than that is why I have an ATV.

 

[Zundfolge]

I had no idea there were so many hunting resources for the handicapped.

So there you go, we can even shun cripples that engage in canned hunts