ORIGINAL: Sylvan
As far as I'm concerned, it's harvesting regardless of whether or not it's fenced or whether or not is over or under 1000 acres. Deer are a resource owned both publically and privately and because they are such prolific breeders need to be managed. When there is an over abundance of them the surplus is harvested to bring numbers back to a proper range that is supportable by the particular habitat. If you take a deer out of that habitat you are particpating in a harvest. What's the big deal here? If you don't want to do your hunting or harvesting or whatever you choose to call it within a fenced area don't. But don't be smug and look down your nose at those who do. There is nothing noble about killing a deer under any conditions. We all do it for our own self satisfaction and imo it is not in any of our interests to criticize others for their (i'm assuming legal) choices or manner of doing it. imoI think we would all be better off just dropping this issue.
One of the best posts on this subject I've heard yet, Sylvan. I have no problem with someone hunting or owning fenced property as long as the animals are wild. Can you walk up and pet them? If so then that's lame. I do have a problem with those that look down and bash either method of hunting. What scares me about high fence hunting and it's proponents is that if this trend continues then there will be no more wide open free places to hunt they will
ALL be privately owned and managed and that's not the way God intended it in my opinion, or the way I want it. This should scare the hell out of all those who love the freedom to hunt a wild animal wherever they want within the legal limits of the law.