Guest tdm69 Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 I want to start off by saying this is just a question and I am not trying to say either of these are right or wrong. Just wondering what people think. These are two different high fence situations that really are very different. What do think? 1. What about the high fenced, up to a couple hundred acres that buys trophy class animals for someone to pick out and shoot? My opinion is that this is not a real hunt. It's like going shopping for an animal to put on your wall and brag about. 2. What about the high fenced plantation who owns several thousand acres and fenced it in and manages the deer herd which already inhabited the land? They don't buy animals to stock the property but instill a very good management program to maintain the hurd they have. My opinion. I don't know how I feel on this one. I like it for the management part and I like that they don't buy animals for people to choose from. What's your opinion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimPic Posted June 14, 2008 Report Share Posted June 14, 2008 As for option #2,there's usually "cull hunts"--the taking out of "inferior animals" because they don't meet their criteria as to what deer hunting should be about.Personally,I think that's BS.They grow the deer to trophy animals,take out the inferior deer(by their standards),and let the hunters pick and shoot the trophy they want--kinda similiar to option #1.JMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckbuster11 Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Don't like either of them, especially the first one. Personally, you wouldn't catch me dead hunting anything behind a fence. I don't care how many acres are in between. Just not my cup of tea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bowtech_archer07 Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Neither are hunting in my opinion. I don't care if it is a couple hundred acres or a couple thousand acres, high fenced "hunting" isn't hunting to me.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnf Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 The second would be a lot more like hunting, but neither really is. If it were exotics like Kudu, Impala or fallow deer I might do it on the second one, but just because I wouldn't want to fly to Africa. I still wouldn't consider it "real hunting". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckee Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 I think there are too many city-slickers with money in their pockets who love hunting, but don't have the opportunities that most of us do. They keep these novices out of our woods, and for that I am grateful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texastrophies Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Guess I will disagree with the majority here, the second type if handled correctly, can be just as challenging and rewarding and hard as any other hunting. Just because it is enclosed doesn't mean it is a guaranteed, canned hunt. Technically speaking, everything in the Americas is enclosed and surrounded by water. I have dove hunted on a 3000 acre high fenced operation, which is small compared to many operations, the camp we stayed at was inside the fence, I saw the fence twice, the day I got there and the day I left. The last day I was there, I forego the morning dove hunt to go to a different area of the ranch and set in a deer stand, overlooking a feeder and a long sendero. There have been numerous deer killed on this ranch in the 160 - 180 range, and that morning I saw no deer at all. I am not trying to change your opinions, just giving you a little different view. I believe any hunter will agree with you on the first scenario, it isn't hunting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravin R10 man Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Neither one bothers me if they are run right. 200 acres in the right type of habitat and you would be hard pressed to even get a chance at a record buck..whitetails are very good at not being seen. Id hunt them both before I make my mind up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NY_Bowhunter14 Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 neither of them are hunting, i never would hunt behind a fence, regardless of the acreage... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tominator Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 Don't like either of them, especially the first one. Personally, you wouldn't catch me dead hunting anything behind a fence. I don't care how many acres are in between. Just not my cup of tea. Ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tdm69 Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 I would not hunt high fence areas. But I have posted this same question on 6 different forums and I have learned from it. Even though I wouldn't do it what about people with life threatening illnesses that won't see next season and it would make them happy to kill a trophy before they die? What about handicapped people who can't do it on their own, should they be left out of the hunt? I wouldn't go as far as saying ban this. I think it has it's place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly Posted June 15, 2008 Report Share Posted June 15, 2008 I'd never look down on anyone who harvested an animal legally. High fences regardless of the amount of land is not for me (now if I lost the use of my legs that might change?). I love taking a B&C / P&Y animal as much as the next guy (or girl), but I'm learning that what makes an animal a trophy is not just antler or skull size. It's the effort the hunter puts forth to take the game. The satisfaction in combatting the elements and devising a plan that unfolds in the hunters favor. It's the satisfaction and sense of accomplishment one has at the end of the hunt that makes an animal a trophy for me. While bear hunting a local informed me that a bear was hanging out right off the highway eating a deer carcass that had been hit by a car. Although the bear activity was poor in my area I at first felt the rush of filling my tag. It lasted about 5 seconds. Then I thought I didn't travel 1700 miles to shoot a bear from my truck. Additionally I'm sure it's illeagel. Where's the satisfaction in that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaret Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Yeah #1 is not hunting. I was watching a show on the outdoor channel, I forget who it was, but these two guys were about I'd say 100 or so yards away from a nice buck. They were basically walking and this buck didn't move at all. They took it. If the deer are so used to humans, that is not a hunt. That's just an alternative for hunters who really can't harvest a buck fair chase. As for #2, if they have thousands of acres, why do they need to build a fence? Are they afraid these deer might leave?But IMHO I'd rather do a fair chase then a closed up pen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaCoyote Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I don't care what people do with there money. I just hate seeing these "managed" deer listed along side wild deer in B&C or P&Y listings. Now there are 4 channels showing hunting shows and at any given time some "hunter" is sitting in a blind shooting deer at a feeder. May as well be high fenced. I guess I don't really have a problem with the method if it floats your boat but it just doesn't look much like hunting to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I might be inclined to hunt an operation where there was high fence if it were large enough that the deer could roam and potentially never see fence, think the terrain has a little to do with factoring in to considering in my opinion as well. Open country with little vegetation would be different from an area that is more vegetated and might be that animals would have a larger core area. To me, eight to ten thousand acres is a pretty big area, and since in many areas of the country a whitetail's core area is only about a square mile outside the rut, it is pretty likely that a deer could live its life to maturity and never see a fence, that would likely be about the minimum in my opinion if I were ever to consider hunting a high fence operation. The first scenario you describe in my opinion is simply cherry picking or buying an animal, and while the shooter still has to effectively shoot and kill his/her animal, it is not the same as a fenced in area like you suggest in the second scenario in my opinion. I would never have an interest in the first scenario you posted. Far as the books go, it might be nice, but I do not have any animals in the books now, and I am fine with that. Sure it would be cool to have a animal make it in the books someday, but so long as I can look at what I have killed and am happy with it, that is really all that matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhino Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 I don't care for the 1st option at all but I agree with texastrophies about the 2nd large high fence area option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 First, both B&C and P&Y do not list any animals that come from inside a high fence. So you're not seeing those listed next to the "free range" entries. Second, has anyone besides TexasTrophies and me actually been inside a high fenced ranch? I think I'm seeing a lot of uninformed opinions here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig mack Posted June 16, 2008 Report Share Posted June 16, 2008 Don't like either of them, especially the first one. Personally, you wouldn't catch me dead hunting anything behind a fence. I don't care how many acres are in between. Just not my cup of tea. Same here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tdm69 Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 First, both B&C and P&Y do not list any animals that come from inside a high fence. So you're not seeing those listed next to the "free range" entries. Second, has anyone besides TexasTrophies and me actually been inside a high fenced ranch? I think I'm seeing a lot of uninformed opinions here. Yeah I think your right on that one, for all the people that hunt deer in texas each year with outfitters. Maybe they don't even know since it's such a huge area that's fenced in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaneB Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 i dont like either situation the only type of fence i hunt is a fence line on a farm and i like wild free ranging game enough said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whttlbucksteve Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I hunt a high fenced place every year.If any one thinks this is an easy task fell free to try.It is 6 square miles and it is open to the public.You can only hunt about 1/5 of it.it is more of a challane then when I hunted the big woods of PA.You have to use your judgement when hunting any place,does this make you feel like you are doing it for the right reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Guess I would kind of have to wonder how you guys who are totally against any high fences feel about government land opened to the public? After being closed for a few years after Sept 11th 2001, the Milan Tennessee arsenal opens up to so many hunters every year. Think if I am not mistaken their property encompasses somewhere in the neighborhood of around 38 thousand acres, how many square miles is that. Sure there are several other similar large places with fences that need hunters to come in and help keep the population in check. I agree the chances of killing a nice buck where hunting pressure is a bit more limited and less animals are probably taken is probably better inside of an area like this, however I do not think that takes anything away from those who are fortunate enough to have someone help get them in to hunt these types of places. Do not think it would be right for me to bash those people either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texan_Til_I_Die Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 ...Think if I am not mistaken their property encompasses somewhere in the neighborhood of around 38 thousand acres, how many square miles is that... Just a little over 59 square miles. More than most people on this site will ever have access to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtnhunt Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Just a little over 59 square miles. More than most people on this site will ever have access to. Exactly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhino Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 Just a little over 59 square miles. More than most people on this site will ever have access to. Exactly. Ditto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.